A formal departmental inquiry has been set up without holding a preliminary inquiry. I want to challenge the validity of the formal departmental inquiry. Is there any rule that preliminary inquiry is not necessary? My superior officer received some complaints against me. The complaints were related to the deliberate defaults in preparation of the electricity bills. In absence of preliminary inquiry I did not defend myself. It is a serious matter and I want to take legal recourse. Please suggest.
A preliminary inquiry is conducted solely in instances where the allegation made is of a weak nature. In such cases, the purpose of the preliminary inquiry is to establish the nature of the alleged default and to identify the alleged defaulter.
It is also conducted to collect prosecution evidence, assess the extent of the default, and bring relevant documents on record to facilitate a regular departmental inquiry.
However, if specific information is available, a preliminary inquiry is not necessary, and the disciplinary authority may order a departmental inquiry directly.
In your case, if the complaints against you were specific and substantial, a preliminary inquiry may not have been necessary, and the disciplinary authority may have ordered a departmental inquiry directly.
If you feel that you have not been given a fair opportunity to defend yourself, you can challenge the validity of the formal departmental inquiry. You can approach the appropriate authority and file a representation stating your grievances and the grounds on which you are challenging the validity of the inquiry.
In case the appropriate authority fails to address your representation, you have the option to file a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. However, before doing so, it is advisable to ensure that the department does not have sufficient evidence against you to initiate a formal departmental inquiry. Then you’ll get relief from the high court.
