Dear,
I do not know much about public sector rules, but I would like to know one thing: why did you not participate in the inquiry? Did you receive information and dates of the inquiry? We want to know this to assess the credibility of the inquiry and whether the principles of natural justice were followed.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
174I do not know much about public sector rules, but I would like to know one thing: why did you not participate in the inquiry? Did you receive information and dates of the inquiry? We want to know this to assess the credibility of the inquiry and whether the principles of natural justice were followed.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The procedure of delivery of the charge sheet as stipulated in the Regulation No.28 of the CDA rules (quote):(this regulation is common in both the rules quoted in the Inquiry & the rule quoted in the punishment order)
“All communications under Rules 23,24,25,26 & 27 and copies of orders passed thereunder may be delivered personally to the employee if he is attending the office:otherwise they shall be sent by registered post to the address noted in the service record.”
They sent two persons from office to my home dt.20.05.08 I quoted in their copy of charge sheet as "under protest & without prejudice".
I protested in writing against their act of harassing my child in my absence despite no provision of sending messanger to home of employee.They did not reply to my protest.
Though I sent them my explanation dt.2.06.08 in writing by which I demanded certain documents on the basis of which the charge sheet was issued,they did not reply to my representation,however,they initiated the enquiry arguing that I did not reply anything to the charge sheet. I have received proof under RTI Act that my reply to charge sheet was attended by the authority dt. 9.06.08.(certified by the same Mr.Kundra who has issued order of punishment).
Since no charge sheet was delivered by the legal procedure as mentioned in the CDA Rules and since my reply was deliberately not considered I chose not to participate in the Inquiry. Further the Inquiry officer did not send me copy of proceedings for first two hearings.
He held the first two enquiries the same date he was holding enquiry with reference to earlier charge sheet dt.13.02.08 to which I participated as the charge sheet 13.02.08 was pasted on the office notice board for three weeks and sent to my home address by registered post .
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
“All communications under Rules 23,24,25,26 & 27 and copies of orders passed thereunder may be delivered personally to the employee if he is attending the office:otherwise they shall be sent by registered post to the address noted in the service record.”
They sent two persons from office to my home dt.20.05.08 I quoted in their copy of charge sheet as "under protest & without prejudice".
I protested in writing against their act of harassing my child in my absence despite no provision of sending messanger to home of employee.They did not reply to my protest.
Though I sent them my explanation dt.2.06.08 in writing by which I demanded certain documents on the basis of which the charge sheet was issued,they did not reply to my representation,however,they initiated the enquiry arguing that I did not reply anything to the charge sheet. I have received proof under RTI Act that my reply to charge sheet was attended by the authority dt. 9.06.08.(certified by the same Mr.Kundra who has issued order of punishment).
Since no charge sheet was delivered by the legal procedure as mentioned in the CDA Rules and since my reply was deliberately not considered I chose not to participate in the Inquiry. Further the Inquiry officer did not send me copy of proceedings for first two hearings.
He held the first two enquiries the same date he was holding enquiry with reference to earlier charge sheet dt.13.02.08 to which I participated as the charge sheet 13.02.08 was pasted on the office notice board for three weeks and sent to my home address by registered post .
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Revribhav,
My suggestion. Hire a local Solicitor or advocate. You seem to have done you own good study and seems you just need a good advocate/solicitor. Be ready for a long fight.
Regards,
ukmitra.
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My suggestion. Hire a local Solicitor or advocate. You seem to have done you own good study and seems you just need a good advocate/solicitor. Be ready for a long fight.
Regards,
ukmitra.
From Saudi Arabia, Riyadh
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I give my consent to mr. mitra’s advise as there are many points where u can win the case. On this platform it is difficult to guide u through the whole process. God bless
From India, Secunderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Secunderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Yes, I am aware of the fact. In fact, it was a senior advocate who advised me that the definition of an employee as mentioned in GIC CDA Rules did not apply to me. Kindly advise me if I can file a complaint against fundamental rights violation to the Supreme Court as they have not, till date, issued a charge sheet against a public servant caught red-handed in their Jaipur office on February 10, 2009, despite the CBI filing a charge sheet against him in the CBI court and advising my employer to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him. My employer is silent on the matter since the public servant who issued me the two charge sheets has been named as the ultimate beneficiary of a bribe in the incident, as per a news report. Instead of taking action, my employer merely transferred him to his home place (Delhi) from Jaipur. They state under RTI that they do not take action based on news reports. I have also received a list from the CBI which shows that despite CBI recommendations for taking disciplinary action, at least two branch managers who were occupying the rank of office in charge continue to occupy the post of in charge of the public office.
On the other hand, the only "grave violation of rules" as of my date of suspension on April 10, 2008, as per the charge sheet dated February 13, 2008, against me is that I left headquarters. The only declared witness of the charge sheet dated May 2, 2008, used derisive language against my working wife in his official statement on the company letterhead to his superior dated March 26, 2008, stating, "it is a surprising fact that the wife of Mr. Soni has left children with her sick husband and she is comfortably doing her job away from her home."
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
On the other hand, the only "grave violation of rules" as of my date of suspension on April 10, 2008, as per the charge sheet dated February 13, 2008, against me is that I left headquarters. The only declared witness of the charge sheet dated May 2, 2008, used derisive language against my working wife in his official statement on the company letterhead to his superior dated March 26, 2008, stating, "it is a surprising fact that the wife of Mr. Soni has left children with her sick husband and she is comfortably doing her job away from her home."
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear [Recipient],
Your case appears to be a purely legalistic matter and can be solved by direct legal help in the place where the litigation is required. Once a punishment is awarded, that order is appealable. Have you filed an appeal as per your company rules? If you merely think you have a good case without following the procedure provided under the rules, even courts of law cannot help you as all your efforts will be barred by delay.
Email: vsrlaw@gmail.com
Best regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your case appears to be a purely legalistic matter and can be solved by direct legal help in the place where the litigation is required. Once a punishment is awarded, that order is appealable. Have you filed an appeal as per your company rules? If you merely think you have a good case without following the procedure provided under the rules, even courts of law cannot help you as all your efforts will be barred by delay.
Email: vsrlaw@gmail.com
Best regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks, I plan to go to Jaipur within a few days to consult a senior advocate who advised me that the definition of an employee is not applicable to me under the CDA rules. This is the basis on which my employer initiated the proceedings. I would seek his advice on whether to appeal in the department or file a petition to the court of law/tribunal.
Please let me know if you need further assistance.
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please let me know if you need further assistance.
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have filed an appeal in the department against two decisions - one to deprive me of 6 increments and the other to dismiss me from services. Ironically, the only "grave" violation of the rule in the charge sheet worth dismissal from services was that, as per the disciplinary authority, I left headquarters. They kept me under suspension on half pay for one and a half years, which they justified in the order.
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have filed departmental appeal in the matter and requested the authority to decide the matter within 10 days.How many days should I reasonably allow them to deemed rejection of my appeal?
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
My employer, an insurance company, has dismissed me from services apparently because they have been "harassed" by applications under the RTI act seeking information on corruption in public life. They have failed to suspend the official who was caught by the CBI on 10.02.2009 with bribe money, despite the CBI filing a charge sheet for corruption. Under the RTI act, I have been informed that it is my personal opinion that the act of bribery was a shameful act.
All the public servants of NIACL representing the new corrupt India, whose list has been provided to me by authorities such as the police or CBI and then passed on by me to the public sector insurance company owned by the Government of India, have been fearlessly performing their duties as public servants because no one dares to take any serious action.
The memorial against unjustified orders has been pending with the authority for disposal. They state under the RTI act that they have no specific time limit for disposal of the same. They seem to have become more aggressive after my complaint to the Human Rights Commission of India, which appears to be the most inhuman organization.
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
All the public servants of NIACL representing the new corrupt India, whose list has been provided to me by authorities such as the police or CBI and then passed on by me to the public sector insurance company owned by the Government of India, have been fearlessly performing their duties as public servants because no one dares to take any serious action.
The memorial against unjustified orders has been pending with the authority for disposal. They state under the RTI act that they have no specific time limit for disposal of the same. They seem to have become more aggressive after my complaint to the Human Rights Commission of India, which appears to be the most inhuman organization.
From India, Ajmer
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.