#CCA Rules 1966

The Chhattisgarh High Court held that the Inspector General of Police lacks the competence to initiate common departmental proceedings against an Inspector, as only the Director General of Police - the sole authority empowered to dismiss such officers - may sanction such action under Rule 18. This clarifies hierarchical limits in police disciplinary processes and protects subordinate officers from unauthorized proceedings by lower-ranking officials.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that absorption into government service triggers full procedural protections under Rule 14 of the CCA Rules, 1966, mandating a formal inquiry before termination-even for misconduct predating regularization. The judgment reinforces that natural justice applies retroactively to past acts once an employee is regularized, protecting government servants from arbitrary dismissal.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that treating 609 days of absence as 'dies non' without a departmental inquiry under CCA Rules 1966 constitutes a major penalty, entitling the employee to full salary, increments, and pension benefits. The judgment reinforces that procedural fairness mandates a formal inquiry before imposing such penalties on government servants.