Natural justice in departmental inquiries requires proof through evidence and cross-examination before a major penalty dismissal stands.

A departmental dismissal under the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules was held unsustainable because the major penalty inquiry did not prove the charges through oral and documentary evidence and did not permit the scrutiny required by Rule 9(13). The inquiry relied mainly on the employee's reply, the presenting officer's submissions, and investigative material, without examining witnesses or establishing the articles of charge through admissible material. Such reliance on unproved investigation material, conjecture, or surmise breached natural justice and could not support a finding of guilt. The dismissal was quashed, reinstatement with consequential benefits followed, and a fresh inquiry was left open from the specified stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the dismissal order was liable to be quashed for breach of the principles of natural justice and for non-compliance with the procedure prescribed for a major penalty inquiry under the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules.

Analysis: The inquiry report showed that the charges were treated as proved mainly on the basis of the delinquent employee's reply, the presenting officer's submissions, and investigative material, without proper production of oral and documentary evidence to prove the articles of charge. Witnesses were not examined and the material relied upon was not subjected to the scrutiny contemplated by Rule 9(13). A departmental inquiry, though not governed by the strict rules of the Evidence Act, must still rest on legally admissible material and follow the minimum requirements of fairness. An inquiry founded on unproved investigation material, surmise, or conjecture cannot sustain a finding of guilt.

Conclusion: The dismissal order was unsustainable and was quashed. The petitioner was entitled to reinstatement with consequential benefits, and a fresh inquiry was left open from the specified stage.

Ratio Decidendi: In a departmental proceeding for major penalty, the charges must be proved by producing oral and documentary evidence and by affording cross-examination; reliance on unproved investigative material or mere conjecture violates natural justice and cannot support dismissal.

---