1. Common Proceedings

1.1 Where two or more Government servants are concerned in any case, the Government or any other authority competent to impose the penalty of dismissal from service on all the Government servants may make an order directing that disciplinary action against all of them be taken in a common proceedings under rule 24 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1991. If the authorities competent to impose the penalty of dismissal from service on such Government servants are different, an order for common proceedings may be made by the highest of such authorities with the consent of the others. The order should specify:
(i) the authority which may function as the disciplinary authority for the purpose of such common proceedings;
(ii) the penalties which such disciplinary authority will be competent to impose;
(iii) whether the proceedings shall be instituted as for a major penalty or for a minor penalty.

1.2 Proformae are prescribed for order for taking disciplinary action, order for appointment of Inquiring Authority and order for appointment of Presenting Officer in common proceedings. (Form Nos. 16,17,18 of Part II of Volume II)

1.3 Common proceedings cannot be instituted if one of the Government servants involved has retired from service. Proceedings against the retired person will have to be held under rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules, 1980 and against the persons in service in terms of rule 24 of the A.P. Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1991. The oral inquiry against them in such a case should be entrusted to the same Inquiring Authority. Common proceedings, when once commenced can however be continued even if one of the persons retires from service in the course of the proceedings. The proceedings will have to be suspended if one of them dies or is dismissed or removed or compulsorily retired from service.

1.4 In the case of Vijay Kumar Nigam (dead) through Lrs. vs. State of M.P., 1997(1) SLR SC 17, the Supreme Court held that taking into account the statement of the co-charged official in common proceedings in adjudging misconduct, is not objectionable.

1.5 A common proceeding against the accused and accuser is an irregularity and it should be avoided.

1.6 There may be cases where two or more persons concerned therein are governed by different disciplinary Rules. In such cases proceedings will have to be instituted separately in accordance with the respective Rules applicable to each one of them and such public servants cannot be dealt with in a common proceeding. (G.O. Ms. No.82 dt.1-3-96 GA (Ser.C) Dept.; Memo.No.59391/Ser.C/2000-2 dt.11-1-2001 G.A. (Ser.C) Dept.)