Can the Disciplinary Authority, during awarding of Punishment in a Major Chargesheet can instead award a minor penalty like Censure ? As per the Standing Order of the company only Minor Chargesheet specifies Censure as a punishment.
Regards
JayDG
From India, Purulia
20Regards
JayDG
From India, Purulia
Sorry, I made some serious error in describing the issue. I need to make some clarification here. Actually, I meant Major & Minor Penalties and not Major & Minor Chargesheet. The Penalties are different (around 3-4 each) for each of the above two types of penalties and depends on the seriousness of the offense. Again, the time given to the charge sheeted employee for representation/reply incase of a minor penalty is 48 Hrs whilst its 7 days for a Major Penalty.
The case in question is that of "Habitual absence from duty without leave or without sufficient cause". If the CSE was given 7 days to make a representation on the charges alleged, can the Disciplinary Authority impose a Minor Penalty like "Censure" instead of one such Major Penalties like "Reduction to a lower grade(s) or post(s) or lower stage(s) in a time scale".
Thanks & Regards
From India, Purulia
The case in question is that of "Habitual absence from duty without leave or without sufficient cause". If the CSE was given 7 days to make a representation on the charges alleged, can the Disciplinary Authority impose a Minor Penalty like "Censure" instead of one such Major Penalties like "Reduction to a lower grade(s) or post(s) or lower stage(s) in a time scale".
Thanks & Regards
From India, Purulia
It is the discretion of the Punishing Authority to give punishment based on so many factors into consideration in Apex level seeing the interest of the organization.
The decision cannot be questioned. In our view it looks like small punishment, but his view may be different. Moreover the punishment is meant for correcting the behaviour of the employees. Not for actual punishment.
From India, Hyderabad
The decision cannot be questioned. In our view it looks like small punishment, but his view may be different. Moreover the punishment is meant for correcting the behaviour of the employees. Not for actual punishment.
From India, Hyderabad
Dear D. GURUMURTHY,
With due respect to you Sir, I have two questions to ask you.
1. Can the Punishing Authority award disproportionate punishment?
2. If services are terminated by way of punishment, do you mean to say that the employee has no right to question the decision or challenge the decision?
I feel answer to above questions will give stuff to the members of the forum.
From India, Mumbai
With due respect to you Sir, I have two questions to ask you.
1. Can the Punishing Authority award disproportionate punishment?
2. If services are terminated by way of punishment, do you mean to say that the employee has no right to question the decision or challenge the decision?
I feel answer to above questions will give stuff to the members of the forum.
From India, Mumbai
Mr Jay
Always remember the "punishment should be in proportionate with the gravity of misconduct".
General Example -
Law does not hang person for just theft. Because gravity of theft is minor than case of murder.
Corporate Example -
Employer cannot terminate employee for just forgetting company I card, Because gravity of forgetting I card is minor than Beating the supervisor on shop floor.
So what I want to tell is you should examine the gravity of misconduct & then go for punishment.
Now it is up to punishment authority that they can reduce the gravity of punishment in case of major misconduct also.
Employees past experience with the company, his behavior,his past attitude is also taken care while reducing the gravity of punishment
Arun J.
From India, Hyderabad
Always remember the "punishment should be in proportionate with the gravity of misconduct".
General Example -
Law does not hang person for just theft. Because gravity of theft is minor than case of murder.
Corporate Example -
Employer cannot terminate employee for just forgetting company I card, Because gravity of forgetting I card is minor than Beating the supervisor on shop floor.
So what I want to tell is you should examine the gravity of misconduct & then go for punishment.
Now it is up to punishment authority that they can reduce the gravity of punishment in case of major misconduct also.
Employees past experience with the company, his behavior,his past attitude is also taken care while reducing the gravity of punishment
Arun J.
From India, Hyderabad
Thanks for the replies. The question hasn't been answer completely is my correct/incorrect observation. Some questions remain -
1. How can one judge whilst formulating a chargesheet, whether the punishment will be minor or major ? That's a lacuna in our system. IMHO, the award of a penalty is the last step after all enquiry has been FAIRLY conducted within the Principles of Natural Justice. Thus the question remain, how can a Enquiry Officer or a Disciplinary Authority frame a chargesheet (i.e. whether it should be 48 Hrs or 7 days or in other words Minor or Major Penalty Chargesheet) when the enquiry itself hasn't been conducted and no report has been submitted.
2. Again, IMO, like many of you have rightly said, its up to the Disciplinary Authority to conduct the Disciplinary proceedings. In that case, the DA might even decide to quash the proceedings if he so thinks in the interest of justice without it completing the complete cycle upto the punishment stage. Infact, I think, that this is one of the power bestowed upon the DA. But here, one fact remains - whether the DA decides on a punishment (and also the quantum of punishment) or decides against it - the REASON got be recorded in WRITING.
3. This is the most important Question. What are the circumstances under which a DA might decide to quash the proceedings or take a lenient view, though, he might have seen the Misconduct initially in the category of a Major Punishment ? Your views are solicited here.
One easy answer would be past experience - but then if its a 1st time simple offense, one is usually let off with a Warning or Censure. But again, isn't the DA smart enough, to have thought and given time on the issue whilst issuing a C/S rather than reacting in the heat of the moment ? Also, in my Co, C/S is usually preceded by a number of warnings and Advisory letters including Counseling for the misconduct of Habitual Absenteeism. So, the question remains, why should there be a change of heart later on ?
There is also the issue of equitable justice here, if one is let off for whatever reason - then all DAs should do the same in similar circumstances with others too. Secondly, it should not be construed as a weakness/partiality leading to more indiscipline in future.
Your views are solicited. Thanks & Regards
From India, Purulia
1. How can one judge whilst formulating a chargesheet, whether the punishment will be minor or major ? That's a lacuna in our system. IMHO, the award of a penalty is the last step after all enquiry has been FAIRLY conducted within the Principles of Natural Justice. Thus the question remain, how can a Enquiry Officer or a Disciplinary Authority frame a chargesheet (i.e. whether it should be 48 Hrs or 7 days or in other words Minor or Major Penalty Chargesheet) when the enquiry itself hasn't been conducted and no report has been submitted.
2. Again, IMO, like many of you have rightly said, its up to the Disciplinary Authority to conduct the Disciplinary proceedings. In that case, the DA might even decide to quash the proceedings if he so thinks in the interest of justice without it completing the complete cycle upto the punishment stage. Infact, I think, that this is one of the power bestowed upon the DA. But here, one fact remains - whether the DA decides on a punishment (and also the quantum of punishment) or decides against it - the REASON got be recorded in WRITING.
3. This is the most important Question. What are the circumstances under which a DA might decide to quash the proceedings or take a lenient view, though, he might have seen the Misconduct initially in the category of a Major Punishment ? Your views are solicited here.
One easy answer would be past experience - but then if its a 1st time simple offense, one is usually let off with a Warning or Censure. But again, isn't the DA smart enough, to have thought and given time on the issue whilst issuing a C/S rather than reacting in the heat of the moment ? Also, in my Co, C/S is usually preceded by a number of warnings and Advisory letters including Counseling for the misconduct of Habitual Absenteeism. So, the question remains, why should there be a change of heart later on ?
There is also the issue of equitable justice here, if one is let off for whatever reason - then all DAs should do the same in similar circumstances with others too. Secondly, it should not be construed as a weakness/partiality leading to more indiscipline in future.
Your views are solicited. Thanks & Regards
From India, Purulia
In continuation to my earlier post, the ONLY reasonable and logical explanation to the segregation of punishment into 2 categories plus iterating the different quantum of punishment in each is to PERHAPS ensure Equitable punishment and remove the chances/possibilities of different punishment for same misconduct. Perhaps it acts as a guide for the DA.
Thanks & Regards
Jay
From India, Purulia
Thanks & Regards
Jay
From India, Purulia
Mr.Jay
For your first question I can answer as follows
In most of the cases the charge sheet is given when you want to go for major punishment.
In minor cases HR doesn't go for charge sheet.
Secondly the 48 Hrs or 7 days is decided on the gravity of misconduct.
Such as misappropriation of funds, Violent behavior etc.
For your second question I can answer as follows
Disciplinary authority can decide the punishment with consultation with HR All the documents are kept recorded. If workmen is not satisfied with the judgement given by disciplinary authority then he can go in the labour court.
For your third question I can answer as follows
For this I can only say it is again depends upon the nature of misconduct.
Arun J.
From India, Hyderabad
For your first question I can answer as follows
In most of the cases the charge sheet is given when you want to go for major punishment.
In minor cases HR doesn't go for charge sheet.
Secondly the 48 Hrs or 7 days is decided on the gravity of misconduct.
Such as misappropriation of funds, Violent behavior etc.
For your second question I can answer as follows
Disciplinary authority can decide the punishment with consultation with HR All the documents are kept recorded. If workmen is not satisfied with the judgement given by disciplinary authority then he can go in the labour court.
For your third question I can answer as follows
For this I can only say it is again depends upon the nature of misconduct.
Arun J.
From India, Hyderabad
Dear Friends
An organization lists out certain conducts as MISCONDUCTS and accordingly there is a process to examine whether such offence has been committed. Ideally, effort should not be wasted on enquiry of all misconducts; there being certain minor ones too. Accordingly, different procedures have been adopted so as to give the misconducts which calls for major penalties to be imposed, due care and detailed enquiries.
Misconducts and the Enquiry process, therefore have been devised to take care of misconducts involving minor and major penalties.
Once the charges are proved, the matter goes to the Competent authority or the Disciplinary authority competent to award punishment. While doing so, the first and foremost requirement is that he should APPLY HIS MIND in awarding punishment. The punishment must be commensurate to the misconduct committed.
Moreover, in awarding the punishment, he also can take into consideration the past tract record of the employee. Also, whether the offence is a first one committed in a long blemish-free career and can be attributed to some momentary lapse or extenuating circumstances beyond the control of the employee ??
There can be several situations where awarding the usual or standard punishment can be excessive or counter-productive. While awarding a more severe punishment than specified can be termed unfair; awarding a MORE LENIENT punishment looking into the circumstances, is entirely within the rights of the Disciplinary Authority.
Moreover, there are several cases, where a harsh punishment awarded by the Disciplinary Authority, has been TONED DOWN by the APPELATE AUTHORITIES.
As such, there is nothing abnormal, in case a more lenient punishment is awarded by the Disciplinary Authority.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
An organization lists out certain conducts as MISCONDUCTS and accordingly there is a process to examine whether such offence has been committed. Ideally, effort should not be wasted on enquiry of all misconducts; there being certain minor ones too. Accordingly, different procedures have been adopted so as to give the misconducts which calls for major penalties to be imposed, due care and detailed enquiries.
Misconducts and the Enquiry process, therefore have been devised to take care of misconducts involving minor and major penalties.
Once the charges are proved, the matter goes to the Competent authority or the Disciplinary authority competent to award punishment. While doing so, the first and foremost requirement is that he should APPLY HIS MIND in awarding punishment. The punishment must be commensurate to the misconduct committed.
Moreover, in awarding the punishment, he also can take into consideration the past tract record of the employee. Also, whether the offence is a first one committed in a long blemish-free career and can be attributed to some momentary lapse or extenuating circumstances beyond the control of the employee ??
There can be several situations where awarding the usual or standard punishment can be excessive or counter-productive. While awarding a more severe punishment than specified can be termed unfair; awarding a MORE LENIENT punishment looking into the circumstances, is entirely within the rights of the Disciplinary Authority.
Moreover, there are several cases, where a harsh punishment awarded by the Disciplinary Authority, has been TONED DOWN by the APPELATE AUTHORITIES.
As such, there is nothing abnormal, in case a more lenient punishment is awarded by the Disciplinary Authority.
Warm regards.
From India, Delhi
With due respect to the questioner and in deep consideration of his initial question and successive posts, I am compelled to raise the following counter-questions to him: For whom the question is being asked? on behalf of the delinquent employee? or on behalf of the Disciplinary Authority? In the case of a delinquent, there is no point in questioning the wisdom behind the lighter or the lightest punishment awarded for a serious misconduct. If it is raised by another delinquent facing the same set of charges of serious misconduct for the simple reason that he has been awarded a major punishment, even then it will be futile to base his defence on such a ground in his appeal for the reason that the DA has discretion of judgment taking into account of the mitigating circumstances of the charges levelled in each and every disciplinary case. The right to impose penalty, carries with it the duty to act justly. The query raised in his third post as to the classification of penalties into minor and major while at the framing stage of charges itself is a pertinent one. To me the reason seems to be rational for it is the effect of an action that always determines its nature whether serious or ordinary. Unless and otherwise there is a Code of Conduct, there is no scope for any misconduct. Misconduct, per se, is a very difficult attribute to be precisely defined as minor and serious.That's why misconduct has been classified as minor and major depending upon the punishment likely to be imposed.The last query in the questioner's penultimate post is indicative of his concern for the precarious position of the DAs in a situation of awarding different punishments to different people on the same or similar type of misconduct. Equitable Justice, in my personal view-point, means the proper admixture of the right to impose penalty and the duty to do it justly. There can not be any straight-jacket formula for this and thus the element of discretion emerges.
From India, Salem
From India, Salem
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Order penalty The New India Assurance Co.doc
CONTRACT OF APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING IN CASE OF MAJOR APPRENTICE.pdf