GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD (S-1) 43 SRR 62 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated 1st June, 1962.
Jyeshta 11, S.E. 1884.
CIRCULAR
No.GAD (S-1) 43 SRR 62 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated 1st June, 1962.
Jyeshta 11, S.E. 1884.
CIRCULAR
According to Rule 11 (5) of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1957, Government servant against whom departmental proceedings are taken can take the assistance of another Government servant with the approval of the disciplinary authority in presenting his defence before the Enquiry Officer; but may not engage a Legal Practitioner for the purpose, unless the person nominated by the Disciplinary Authority or a specially empowered authority, as the case may be is a Legal Practitioner. This is in lieu of the assistance of the Legal Practitioner. It implies that the assisting Government Servant may do whatever a Legal Practitioner would do for his Client i.e., to cross-examine witnesses examined in support of the charges, examine defence witnesses and even argue.
It has been brought to the notice of Government that a Government servant nominated under Rule 11 (5) of the said rules by an accused Government servant was not permitted by an Enquiry Officer to cross-examine witnesses in support of the charges and to argue the case for the defence, the contention being that Rule 11 (5) of the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, permits an accused Government servant to take only the services of another Government servant and that such assistance cannot include the right to cross-examine the witnesses and to argue the case. The procedure adopted by the Enquiry Officer if this case is not correct. Government Servants are denied the benefit or expert legal practitioner in defending themselves and whatever little assistance they expect from their colleagues who are Government Servants, will be thwarted, if the enquiry officer does not permit a Government servant whose assistance, another Government servant takes under Rule 11(5) to cross-examine the witness. Government servant assisting another Government servant under Rule 11(5) of the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules should be permitted to do whatever a Lawyer would do for his Client viz. to cross-examine witnesses examined in support of the charges, examine defence witnesses and even argue the case.
Sd/-
B.Purushotham,
Uneder Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Services-1)
It has been brought to the notice of Government that a Government servant nominated under Rule 11 (5) of the said rules by an accused Government servant was not permitted by an Enquiry Officer to cross-examine witnesses in support of the charges and to argue the case for the defence, the contention being that Rule 11 (5) of the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, permits an accused Government servant to take only the services of another Government servant and that such assistance cannot include the right to cross-examine the witnesses and to argue the case. The procedure adopted by the Enquiry Officer if this case is not correct. Government Servants are denied the benefit or expert legal practitioner in defending themselves and whatever little assistance they expect from their colleagues who are Government Servants, will be thwarted, if the enquiry officer does not permit a Government servant whose assistance, another Government servant takes under Rule 11(5) to cross-examine the witness. Government servant assisting another Government servant under Rule 11(5) of the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules should be permitted to do whatever a Lawyer would do for his Client viz. to cross-examine witnesses examined in support of the charges, examine defence witnesses and even argue the case.
Sd/-
B.Purushotham,
Uneder Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Services-1)
No comments:
Post a Comment