Pre-decisional disclosure of UPSC advice is required in disciplinary action when punishment rests on that material.

Where disciplinary punishment is founded on UPSC advice, that advice must be furnished to the delinquent employee before the final decision so an effective representation can be made. Rule 32 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 refers to supplying the advice with the final order, but the governing natural justice principle requires advance disclosure when the advice is relied on as material supporting punishment. The Court treated S. K. Kapoor as correctly stating the law and held the contrary view in T. V. Patel per incuriam for not noticing binding earlier authority. Non-supply at the pre-decisional stage violates natural justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the disciplinary authority was required to furnish the Union Public Service Commission advice to the government servant before imposing punishment and whether non-supply of that advice at the pre-decisional stage vitiated the disciplinary action for breach of natural justice.

Analysis: Rule 32 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 speaks of furnishing a copy of the Commission's advice along with the final order, but the governing principle is that where the advice is relied upon against the delinquent employee, it forms part of the material on which the punishment rests. In the light of the later understanding of natural justice adopted in disciplinary proceedings, the employee must receive the relevant material in advance so as to make an effective representation. The decision in S. K. Kapoor was treated as correctly stating the law, while the contrary view in T. V. Patel was held to have been rendered per incuriam because it did not notice the binding earlier authority. The Court also noted that the later executive instructions were consistent with this position.

Conclusion: The UPSC advice had to be supplied before the final decision on punishment was taken, and non-supply at that stage amounted to violation of natural justice; the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: When disciplinary action is founded on advice of the UPSC, the advice must be furnished in advance to the delinquent employee so that an effective representation can be made, and a contrary co-equal bench view rendered in ignorance of binding precedent is per incuriam.

---