Second show-cause notice not required after disciplinary inquiry when charges were heard and service rules were satisfied.

After the Forty-Second Amendment, Article 311(2) and the amended service rules no longer require a second opportunity to show cause against the proposed penalty once the charged employee has received notice of the allegations and a reasonable hearing in the inquiry. The disciplinary authority may impose the appropriate penalty on the basis of the inquiry findings without issuing a further notice on punishment. The inquiry report supplied after the order does not revive any right to a second show-cause notice. The dismissal could not be set aside for want of that further opportunity, and the matter was remitted for decision on the remaining merits of the disciplinary appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after the Forty-Second Amendment to Article 311(2) and the amended Rule 15(4) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, a government servant is entitled to a second opportunity to show cause against the proposed punishment before the penalty is imposed.

Analysis: The amendment to Article 311(2) deleted the earlier requirement of a reasonable opportunity to make representation on the proposed penalty, and the first proviso expressly provides that it is not necessary to give such an opportunity. The amended Rule 15(4) similarly authorises the disciplinary authority, on the basis of the inquiry findings and evidence, to impose the appropriate penalty without issuing a further notice on the proposed punishment. Once the respondent had been informed of the charges and given a reasonable opportunity in the inquiry, the constitutional and service-rule requirements stood satisfied. The inquiry report, supplied after the order, could not revive a right to a second show-cause notice. The High Court therefore erred in holding that the dismissal was vitiated for want of a further opportunity.

Conclusion: The respondent had no enforceable right to a second show-cause notice against the punishment, and the dismissal could not be set aside on that ground.

Final Conclusion: The High Court's setting aside of the dismissal was reversed, and the matter was sent back for decision on the remaining merits of the disciplinary appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: After the Forty-Second Amendment, Article 311(2) and the corresponding service rules no longer require a second opportunity to make representation on the proposed penalty once a proper inquiry with notice of charges and reasonable hearing has been afforded.

---