Disciplinary inquiry must stay within the original complaint and rest on independent, reasoned findings before adverse action

Disciplinary proceedings under the governing statute must stay within the scope of the complaint or information received, and the inquiry cannot be enlarged to include unrelated charges. The Council, acting in a quasi-judicial capacity, must also record its own independent and reasoned findings after considering the report; a mechanical adoption of recommendations is insufficient. Where the inquiry exceeds the original allegations and the final recommendation lacks independent reasons, the proceedings are unsustainable and are to be filed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the disciplinary proceedings and the Council's recommendation were unsustainable for enlarging the inquiry beyond the information originally received and for proceeding without independent, reasoned findings.

Analysis: The information received by the Institute was confined to alleged non-compliance concerning disclosure requirements under the Companies Act, yet the inquiry was expanded to additional charges that did not form part of that information. The disciplinary mechanism under the governing statute and regulations required the inquiry to remain within the bounds of the information or complaint and, at the Council stage, required the Council to record its own findings after considering the report. The recommendation was found to be unsupported by independent reasons and to have been adopted mechanically, notwithstanding the quasi-judicial character of the process and the settled requirement that adverse orders must be reasoned.

Conclusion: The expanded charges and the unreasoned recommendations could not be sustained, and the proceedings were directed to be filed.

---