RBE No. 33/1995: Suspension – Time Limit
No.E(D&A)95 RG6-21, dated 06.04.1995
Sub: Suspension of Government employee – Time limit regarding.
1. A copy of the Department of Personnel’s OM No.11012/7/78-Estt.(A), dated 14.09.1978 on the above subject is enclosed for information and guidance along with a copy each of their OM No.39/39/70-Estt.(A), dated 04.02.1971 and OM No.39/33/72-Estt.(A), dated 16.12.1972 referred to therein.
2. Incidentally, instructions contained in DOP’s OM dated 04.02.1971 are the same as contained in Board’s circular letter No.E(D&A)70 RG6-14, dated 15.03.1971 stand to Railway earlier. Since instructions dated 04.02.1971 of DOP have been further modified in some cases in their OM No.39/33/72-Estt.(A), dated 16.12.1972 and their OM No.11012/7/78-Estt.(A), dated 14.09.1978 reiterates that the time limit laid down in their office memorandum dated 04.02.1971 and 16.12.1972 should be scrupulously observed and in no case the Government servants should continue to be placed under suspension for unduly long periods, it is desired that the instructions contained in DOP’s OMs dated 14.09.1978, 16.12.1972 and 04.02.1971 may please be brought to the notice of all concerned, for strict compliance.
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Department of Personnel
OM No.11012/7/78-Estt.(A), dated 14.09.1978
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Sub: Suspension – Reduction of time limit fixed for serving charge sheet suggestion in the meeting of National Council (JCM) held on 26th September, 1970.
In the Ministry of Home Affairs OM No.221/18/65-AVD, dated the 7th September, 1965, the attention of all disciplinary authority was drawn to the need for quick disposal of cases of Government servants under suspension and it was desired, in particular, that the investigations in such cases should be completed and a charge sheet filed in court, in cases of prosecution, or served on the Government servant, in case of departmental proceedings, within six months. The matter was considered further at a meeting of the National Counting held on the 27th January, 1971 and in partial modification of the earlier order it has been decided that every effort should be made to file the charge-sheet in court or serve the charge sheet on the Government servant, as the case may be, within three months of the date of suspension, and in cases in which it may not be possible to do so, the disciplinary authority should report the matter to the next higher authority explaining the reasons for the delay.
I am to add that the information requested for in the Department of Personnel OM No.39/39/70-Estt.(A), dated December 14, 1970 will still be required and may please be sent to the Department of Personnel, as early as possible, if that has not been done already.
The Ministry of Finance etc. are requested to bring this to the notice of all disciplinary authorities.
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Department of Personnel
OM No.11012/7/78-Estt.(A), dated 14.09.1978
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Sub: Suspension of Government employee – Time limit regarding.
1. The undersigned is directed to say that in this Department’s Office Memorandum No.39/39/70-Estt.(A), dated the 4th February, 1971, it is provided that every effort should be made to file the charge sheet in court or serve the charge sheet on the Government servant, as the case may be, within three months of the date of Suspension, and in case in which it may not be possible to do so, the disciplinary authority should report the matter to the next higher authority explaining the reason for the delay. It is further provided in this Department’s Office Memorandum No.39/33/72-Estt.(A), dated the 16th December, 1972 that while the Office Memorandum of 4th February, 1971 would continue to be operative in regard to cases pending in courts in respect of the period of suspension pending investigation before the filing of a charge sheet in the Court as also in respect of serving of the charge sheet on the Government servant in cases of departmental proceedings, in cases other than those planning in courts, the total period of suspension viz. both in respect of investigation and disciplinary proceedings, should not ordinarily exceed six months. In exceptional cases where it is not possible to adhere to this time limit, the disciplinary authority should report the matter to the next higher authority explaining the reason for the delay.
2. In spite of the instructions referred to above, instanced have come to notice in which Government servants continued to be under suspension for unduly long periods. Such unduly long suspension while putting the employee concerned to undue hardship, involves payment of subsistence allowance without the employee performing any useful service to the Government. It is, therefore, impressed on all the authorities concerned that they should scrupulously observed the time limits laid down in the Office Memoranda referred to in the preceding paragraph and review the cases of suspension to see whether continued suspension in all cases is really necessary. The authorities superior to the disciplinary authority should also exercise a strict check on cases in which delay has occurred and give appropriate directions to the disciplinary authorities keeping in view the provisions contained in the Office Memorandum.
3. Ministry of Finance etc. are requested to bring the contents of this Office Memorandum to the notice of all authorities under their control for information and appropriate action.
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Department of Personnel
OM No.39/33/72-Estt.(A), dated 16.12.1972
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Sub: Suspension of Government servants – Recommendations of the Administrative Reforms Commission in their Report on ‘Personnel Administration’.
1. The Administrative Reforms Commission, in their Report on Personnel Administration have made the following observations in Chapter IX (Conduct and Discipline) of the Report:-
“Officials remain, at present, under suspension for considerable long periods, because of the delays in the decision of their cases. Instructions exit that, as far as possible, investigation in disciplinary cases should be completed and a charge sheet filed in the court of law in cases of prosecution of the memorandum of charges served in the case of departmental proceedings, within a period of six months; if cases are likely to be delayed, the question of revocation of suspension order should be examined. These instructions have not been followed in very many cases, and this indicates a lack of a sense of urgency among these handling the cases.
We recommend that no person should ordinarily be kept under suspension for a period of more than three months except in cases pending in the Courts. If reinstatement of the official is considered to be fraught with risk of the evidence of the departmental cases being tampered with or the departmental proceedings being hampered, the official should be transferred to any other place where no such risk exists. Approval of a higher authority should be obtained for keeping official under suspension beyond a period of three months.”
2. This recommendation has been examined by the Government. The Ministry of Home Affairs (now Department of Personnel) Office Memorandum No.221/18/65-AVD, dated the 7th September, 1965, had already emphasized the need for quick disposal of the cases of Government servants under suspension and it was desired in particular that the investigation in such cases should be completed, and a charge sheet filed in the court in cases of prosecution, or served on the Government servant, in cases of departmental proceedings, within six months. These instructions were further elaborated and Department of Personnel Office Memorandum No.39/39/70-Estt.(A), dated the 4th February, 1971, as a result of discussion in the National Council of the Joint Consultative Machinery. It was laid down in these instructions that every effort should be made to file the charge sheet in court or serve the charge sheet on the Government servant, as the case may be, within three months of the date of suspension and in cases in which it might not be possible to do so, the disciplinary authority should report the matter to the next higher authority explaining the reasons for the delay.
3. It would thus be observed that Government have already reduced the period of suspension during investigation, barring exceptional cases which are to be reported to higher authority, from six months to three months. It has now been decided that while the orders contained pending in courts in the Office Memorandum of 4th February, 1971 would continue to be operative in regard to cases pending in court in respect of the period of suspension pending investigation before the filing of charge sheet in the court as also in respect of serving of the charge sheet on the Government Servant in cases of departmental proceedings, in cases other than those pending in chords the total period of suspension viz., both in respect of investigation and disciplinary proceedings, should not ordinarily exceed six months. In exceptional cases where it is not possible to adhere to this time limit, the disciplinary authority should report the matter to the next higher authority, explaining reasons for the delay.
4. This decision may be brought to the notice of all administrative authorities in or under the Ministry of Finance, etc. for information and appropriate action.
Download Railway Board Circular RBE No. 33/1995
Forward reference ⇒ RBE No.