Disciplinary authority approval for charge memo is mandatory; prior approval to initiate proceedings does not validate issuance.

Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules required the disciplinary authority to approve the charge memo itself before it was issued, and not merely to approve initiation of major penalty proceedings. The Court read Article 311 protections with Rules 14(3) and 14(4), and held that a subordinate could only assist in drawing up the draft charge sheet as an ancillary act. Because the Finance Minister, acting as disciplinary authority, had approved initiation of proceedings but had not separately approved the charge memo when it was issued, the charge sheet lacked authority of law and was treated as non est. The appeals were dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a charge sheet issued under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 was without jurisdiction because the Finance Minister, acting as the disciplinary authority, had approved initiation of major penalty proceedings but had not separately approved the charge memo.

Analysis: Article 311(1) of the Constitution of India protects a civil servant from action by an authority subordinate to the appointing authority, and Article 311(2) requires a fair inquiry before major penalty action. Rule 14(3) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 requires the disciplinary authority to draw up or cause to be drawn up the charge sheet, while Rule 14(4) requires delivery of the articles of charge and supporting material to the delinquent officer. The office order relied upon by the parties was read as requiring separate approval for the charge memo itself, distinct from the earlier approval to initiate disciplinary proceedings. The Court rejected the contention that approval to initiate proceedings automatically included approval of the charge memo, holding that the approval had not been granted by the disciplinary authority at the stage when the charge memo was issued. It further held that the rule permits only ancillary drawing-up of the draft by a subordinate, not final issuance without the disciplinary authority's approval.

Conclusion: The charge sheet was held to be without authority of law and non est, and the appeals were dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the governing rule and administrative order require the disciplinary authority to approve the charge memo, prior approval only for initiation of proceedings does not suffice, and issuance of the charge sheet without such approval is invalid.

---