Bias in domestic enquiries can void dismissal when a witness also sits in judgment, with fresh enquiry still possible

A disciplinary enquiry is vulnerable where a member of the enquiry committee is also a material witness against the employee, because such participation creates a real likelihood and appearance of bias and breaches natural justice. The objection may be raised on admitted facts even if not separately advanced before departmental authorities. Where the defect lies in the committee's composition, the enquiry and dismissal cannot stand, but a lawful fresh enquiry may be directed from the charge-sheet stage before a differently constituted committee. The note also records that full back wages need not follow automatically and that only partial salary relief may be granted.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the domestic enquiry and the consequential dismissal were vitiated because a member of the enquiry committee was also a witness against the delinquent employee and had an apparent bias; (ii) what consequential relief should follow, including whether a fresh enquiry could be directed and what monetary relief, if any, should be granted.

Issue (i): Whether the domestic enquiry and the consequential dismissal were vitiated because a member of the enquiry committee was also a witness against the delinquent employee and had an apparent bias.

Analysis: The participation of a person as both judge and witness in the same disciplinary process offended the rule that no one shall be a judge in his own cause. The objection to his inclusion was on record, the charge in question was directly connected with his testimony, and his continued participation created a real likelihood as well as an appearance of bias. In such circumstances, the defect went to the root of the enquiry and was not cured by the fact that other charges were also considered. A plea of bias based on admitted facts could be entertained even if not separately urged before the departmental authorities.

Conclusion: The enquiry and the orders founded on it were held to be vitiated by bias and violation of natural justice, in favour of the Appellant.

Issue (ii): What consequential relief should follow, including whether a fresh enquiry could be directed and what monetary relief, if any, should be granted.

Analysis: Since the defect lay in the composition of the enquiry committee, the disciplinary proceedings were set aside without foreclosing a lawful fresh enquiry from the stage of the charge-sheet. The Court also balanced the equities by declining full back wages and directing payment of only a part of the salary for the relevant period, with future salary to follow as applicable. A fresh enquiry was permitted only with a different committee and within a fixed time.

Conclusion: Fresh disciplinary proceedings were permitted from the charge-sheet stage, and limited monetary relief was granted, in favour of the Appellant.

Final Conclusion: The dismissal based on the tainted enquiry could not stand, the appellate judgment was set aside, and the employee obtained restoration of the disciplinary process only to the extent of a lawful fresh enquiry together with partial salary relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A disciplinary enquiry is invalid where a person who is a material witness against the delinquent also sits in judgment in the same enquiry, because such participation creates a real likelihood of bias and violates the rule of natural justice that justice must not only be done but must also appear to be done.

---