12. Further admitted position as it stands is that even in the departmental inquiry, no witness was examined on behalf of the Management and the Inquiry Officer straightaway called the delinquent employee i.e. the respondent no.1 in this case to produce his evidence in defence to the allegations/charges levelled against him. The said procedure adopted by the Inquiry Officer is apparently in contravention to the procedure for conducting a departmental inquiry particularly under Rule 14 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules which provide for specific procedure for initiating disciplinary action involving major misconduct. The requirement is first to issue a charge sheet, call for the reply and not being satisfied with the reply, the authorities are expected to initiate disciplinary proceedings. In the instant case, the issuance of charge sheet was along with an order of appointment of Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer which shows that the reply of the employee was not of much relevance so far as the petitioner is concerned. Further, as per procedure, the Management has not led any evidence particularly of the Head Master who had issued the letter dated 19.11.2009 stating that the school leaving certificate submitted by the respondentemployee to be fake or fraudulent nor any employee from the education department or from the particular school was examined to substantiate this contention. Another fact which is revealed is that along with the charge sheet the petitioners had cited certain witnesses but those witnesses also were not examined.
