The answer to this question is Option A.
Somewhere in class, SS sir told that if M/C does not accept the sanctions, the matter goes to DRC. and the decision of DRC will be final and binding on M/C. Right?
My doubt is if the determination of sanctions has already been performed by PCS and DRC then why is there a provision like appeal to DRC as mentioned in the above Para. Adjudicating authority should not be the reviewing/appellate authority.
Please Clarify.
Thanks
Suppose that m/c has done something wrong and is accused. Now pcs has declared that the m/c is at fault and there is a violation of standard. But m/c is not acceptimg the sanctions and he goes to drc. Now drc is looking into the matter and there can be 2 cases
Case 1 – member is not at default and drc determines that no violation has taken place – in this case m/c is proved innocent and he will be free from all sanctions.
Case 2 – member is at default and drc determines that there is violation of code and standards. The member will have to accept all sanctions.
In both the cases both bodies have the power to determine whether violation of code & standards has taken place or not.
This is the explanation of the question attested.
I am not getting what you are trying to say by this line “Adjudicating authority should not be the reviewing/appellate authority” – please write it in simple language and use hindi if you want.
Hope this helps
DRC is a volunteer committee who serve on panel to review conduct and partner with PCS to establish and review PC policies. you can refer to this link if it helps further.
https://www.cfainstitute.org/en/about/governance/committees/disciplinary-review