Separate approval for charge memorandum is mandatory under disciplinary rules; later ratification cannot cure the defect.

Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 requires separate and conscious approval both for initiating disciplinary proceedings and for drawing up the charge memorandum. Approval for initiation does not validate a charge memorandum issued without the distinct approval required at the charging stage. A memorandum issued without that approval is legally non est, not a mere irregularity, and cannot be cured by ex post facto approval even while the disciplinary proceeding remains pending. The challenge to the disciplinary action therefore succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether a charge memorandum issued without prior approval of the disciplinary authority under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 could be validated by subsequent ex post facto approval, and whether such defect could be cured while the disciplinary proceeding was pending.

Analysis: Rule 14 contemplates independent approval at two stages: first, for initiation of disciplinary proceedings, and second, for drawing up or causing to be drawn up the charge memorandum. Approval for initiation does not amount to approval of the charge memorandum. Where the charge memorandum is issued without the requisite approval, it is a fundamentally defective and non-existent instrument in the eye of law. Such a defect goes beyond a mere irregularity and cannot be cured retrospectively by later approval, even if the proceeding is still pending. The earlier decision interpreting the same rule correctly treated the approval requirement as an essential safeguard requiring separate and conscious application of mind at the stage of issuance of charges.

Conclusion: Ex post facto approval could not validate the charge memorandum, and the challenge to the disciplinary action succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, approval for initiation of disciplinary proceedings and approval of the charge memorandum are separate mandatory acts requiring independent application of mind, and a charge memorandum issued without such approval is non est and incapable of retrospective validation.

---