https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303234 A departmental inquiry is not invalid merely because no Presenting Officer is appointed, since Rule 9(9)(c) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968 is enabling rather than mandatory. However, the Inquiry Officer cannot assume the role of prosecutor: if he conducts the examination-in-chief of departmental witnesses, leads the prosecution case, or cross-examines defence witnesses to prove the charge, he loses impartiality and the inquiry is tainted by bias and breach of natural justice. The inquiry was therefore vitiated on the manner of conduct, while the absence of a Presenting Officer alone was not fatal. en-us Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Jul 2022 11:40:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303234 A departmental inquiry is not invalid merely because no Presenting Officer is appointed, since Rule 9(9)(c) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968 is enabling rather than mandatory. However, the Inquiry Officer cannot assume the role of prosecutor: if he conducts the examination-in-chief of departmental witnesses, leads the prosecution case, or cross-examines defence witnesses to prove the charge, he loses impartiality and the inquiry is tainted by bias and breach of natural justice. The inquiry was therefore vitiated on the manner of conduct, while the absence of a Presenting Officer alone was not fatal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 05 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303234