https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185215 In a departmental inquiry under Rule 7(5) of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1952, discretion to allow legal representation had to be exercised fairly and consistently with natural justice. Where the charges could lead to dismissal and the presenting officer was legally trained, refusing counsel to an employee with no legal background was held to deny a real and reasonable opportunity of defence. The refusal was therefore invalid, and the employee was entitled to have the earlier witnesses made available for cross-examination through a lawyer in the resumed inquiry. en-us Wed, 05 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Aug 2016 11:33:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185215 In a departmental inquiry under Rule 7(5) of the Haryana Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1952, discretion to allow legal representation had to be exercised fairly and consistently with natural justice. Where the charges could lead to dismissal and the presenting officer was legally trained, refusing counsel to an employee with no legal background was held to deny a real and reasonable opportunity of defence. The refusal was therefore invalid, and the employee was entitled to have the earlier witnesses made available for cross-examination through a lawyer in the resumed inquiry. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 05 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185215