Sir; what is the sequence of issuing warning letter,showcause notice,disciplinary letter and chargesheet and domestic enquiry and what is the time period for issuing one letter after another? Regards
From India, Mumbai
6From India, Mumbai
The sequence is: (1) Show cause notice to the employee for misconduct or irregularity on his part, if noticed; (2) Issue of warning letter (if the charge is not of serious nature and committed for the first time) or issue of a charge sheet (if misconduct is of serious nature) against the erring employee; (3) Conduct of Domestic inquiry by the Disciplinary Authority, or by appointment of an independent Inquiring Authority and a Presenting Officer on behalf of the Disc. Authority; (4) Supply of Inquiry Report to the accused employee to call for representation, if any, the employee desires to make against the findings of the Inquiring Authority; and (5) Issue of penalty order, only if the charge is proved against the employee. Otherwise, if not proved, order has to be issued for his exoneration of the charge. Show cause notice or the disciplinary letter are synonymous to each other.
From India, Delhi
From India, Delhi
Dear sir; what is sequence means what is first letter and so on and after how much time one can issue second letter Regards
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Sequence has already been given. Rest depends upon conclusion of different stages of one and the other event depending upon the nature of the case and response to the previous sequntial step of each event.
Better discuss the real problem to get the solution to that specific problem. If you want to learn the whole process of the disciplinary proceedings that cannot be taught to you in one go. For that you may have to go through books of various authors, as the process is neither an easy one, nor a one day, one week or even one month's job. That can take months together. Plenty of steps are there to take before finalising each stage of the events listed by you. So, no time frame can be possible to be antecipated due to complexity of the process and the circumstances. You will have to spend a lot of time also to learn the whole process, but still you will feel lack of perfection having attained in the process.
From India, Delhi
Better discuss the real problem to get the solution to that specific problem. If you want to learn the whole process of the disciplinary proceedings that cannot be taught to you in one go. For that you may have to go through books of various authors, as the process is neither an easy one, nor a one day, one week or even one month's job. That can take months together. Plenty of steps are there to take before finalising each stage of the events listed by you. So, no time frame can be possible to be antecipated due to complexity of the process and the circumstances. You will have to spend a lot of time also to learn the whole process, but still you will feel lack of perfection having attained in the process.
From India, Delhi
You can go thru' the material in this link for better understanding of the subject -
http://aipnbsf.org/files/Microsoft%2...%20Enquiry.pdf.
Normally the Domestic inquiry and guidelines are provided in the Standing Orders of an Estt. The time limits also shall find place in the guidelines. However there are certain discretionary powers given to the Presiding Officer who conducts the inquiry w.r.t. the time limits for every stages and would in conclusion gives his/her verdict on the charges referred to the PO. Time limits would depend on the nature of charges, documents & parties, witnesses involved etc. At the same time schedule for every stage should be logical and reasonable. If the inquiry dragging or the parties involved are dragging to comply with the orders of the PO, or the PO himself not adhering to reasonable time it will be open for criticism, this might jeopardize the inquiry itself. These kinds of time delay might give room for intervention of courts for judicial review of the process.
From India, Bangalore
http://aipnbsf.org/files/Microsoft%2...%20Enquiry.pdf.
Normally the Domestic inquiry and guidelines are provided in the Standing Orders of an Estt. The time limits also shall find place in the guidelines. However there are certain discretionary powers given to the Presiding Officer who conducts the inquiry w.r.t. the time limits for every stages and would in conclusion gives his/her verdict on the charges referred to the PO. Time limits would depend on the nature of charges, documents & parties, witnesses involved etc. At the same time schedule for every stage should be logical and reasonable. If the inquiry dragging or the parties involved are dragging to comply with the orders of the PO, or the PO himself not adhering to reasonable time it will be open for criticism, this might jeopardize the inquiry itself. These kinds of time delay might give room for intervention of courts for judicial review of the process.
From India, Bangalore
Sir,
Is a second show cause notice, disclosing the proposed punishment is must?
There are two views.
1.After the amendment to constitution of article 311, it is dispensed with. Many PSU CDA rules have removed the second show cause notice.
2.After the below supreme court rulings, it is treated as must.
Supreme Court – Union of India Vs Mohd Ramzan Khan, 20-11-1990, 1991 AIR 471, Proposed punishment has to be intimated by second show cause notice
“3....Supply of a copy of the enquiry report along with recommendation, if any, in the matter of proposed punishment to be inflicted would be within the rules of natural justice”
Supreme Court – The Management of Sri Ganapati Bus Service Vs The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, 13-12-2000, No Show cause notice proposing punishment. Dismissal held not valid
“The labour court also found that before awarding punishment of dismissal no show-cause notice as to the quantum of punishment had been issued”
Supreme Court : Union Of India vs Madhusudan Prasad on 28 October, 2003 Equivalent citations: 2004 (1) BLJR 78, 2003 (4) CTC 796, 2003 (4) JCR 231 SC Bench: K Balakrishnan, A Lakshmanan
"The above case was concerning an employee, proceeded, who was found guilty in an enquiry but the report was not furnished to the employee and show cause notice was not served on him. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court directed appropriate order should be passed regarding the back wages. In the instant case the appellate authority directed reinstatement of the respondent and held that he was not entitled to get back wages for the period he was out of service. It may be noticed that the respondent was removed from service without any enquiry and he was not even given show causes notice prior to his dismissal from service. There was fault on the part of the employer in not following the principle of natural justice. These relevant facts were considered and the learned Single Judge and also the Division Bench ordered the payment of back wages. We do not think this is a fit case where the Fundamental Rule 54 could have been invoked by the authorities. We find no merit in the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed."
Supreme Court : The High Court Of Judicature At ... vs Shashikant S.Patil And Anr. on 28 October, 1999 AIR 2000 SC 22, 2000 (67) ECC 16, JT 1999 (8) SC 493 Author: K Thomas Bench: K Thomas, A Mishra, S S Quadri
"20. Legal position on that score has been stated by this Court in A.N. D' Sitva v. Union of India, that neither the findings of the Inquiry Officer nor his recommendations are binding on the punishing authority. The aforesaid position was settled by a Constitution Bench of this Court way back in 1963, Union of India v. H.C. Goel. . The Bench held that "the Government may agree with the report or may differ, either wholly or partially, from the conclusion recorded in the report." Their Lordships laid down the following principle: If the report makes findings in favour of the public servant and the Government disagree with the said findings and holds that the charges framed against the public servant are prima facie proved, the Government should decide provisionally what punishment should be imposed on the public servant and proceed to issue a second notice against him in that behalf."
From India, Salem
Is a second show cause notice, disclosing the proposed punishment is must?
There are two views.
1.After the amendment to constitution of article 311, it is dispensed with. Many PSU CDA rules have removed the second show cause notice.
2.After the below supreme court rulings, it is treated as must.
Supreme Court – Union of India Vs Mohd Ramzan Khan, 20-11-1990, 1991 AIR 471, Proposed punishment has to be intimated by second show cause notice
“3....Supply of a copy of the enquiry report along with recommendation, if any, in the matter of proposed punishment to be inflicted would be within the rules of natural justice”
Supreme Court – The Management of Sri Ganapati Bus Service Vs The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, 13-12-2000, No Show cause notice proposing punishment. Dismissal held not valid
“The labour court also found that before awarding punishment of dismissal no show-cause notice as to the quantum of punishment had been issued”
Supreme Court : Union Of India vs Madhusudan Prasad on 28 October, 2003 Equivalent citations: 2004 (1) BLJR 78, 2003 (4) CTC 796, 2003 (4) JCR 231 SC Bench: K Balakrishnan, A Lakshmanan
"The above case was concerning an employee, proceeded, who was found guilty in an enquiry but the report was not furnished to the employee and show cause notice was not served on him. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court directed appropriate order should be passed regarding the back wages. In the instant case the appellate authority directed reinstatement of the respondent and held that he was not entitled to get back wages for the period he was out of service. It may be noticed that the respondent was removed from service without any enquiry and he was not even given show causes notice prior to his dismissal from service. There was fault on the part of the employer in not following the principle of natural justice. These relevant facts were considered and the learned Single Judge and also the Division Bench ordered the payment of back wages. We do not think this is a fit case where the Fundamental Rule 54 could have been invoked by the authorities. We find no merit in the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed."
Supreme Court : The High Court Of Judicature At ... vs Shashikant S.Patil And Anr. on 28 October, 1999 AIR 2000 SC 22, 2000 (67) ECC 16, JT 1999 (8) SC 493 Author: K Thomas Bench: K Thomas, A Mishra, S S Quadri
"20. Legal position on that score has been stated by this Court in A.N. D' Sitva v. Union of India, that neither the findings of the Inquiry Officer nor his recommendations are binding on the punishing authority. The aforesaid position was settled by a Constitution Bench of this Court way back in 1963, Union of India v. H.C. Goel. . The Bench held that "the Government may agree with the report or may differ, either wholly or partially, from the conclusion recorded in the report." Their Lordships laid down the following principle: If the report makes findings in favour of the public servant and the Government disagree with the said findings and holds that the charges framed against the public servant are prima facie proved, the Government should decide provisionally what punishment should be imposed on the public servant and proceed to issue a second notice against him in that behalf."
From India, Salem
A domestic enquiry, once started, can take many months (from 10-20 sittings) depending on the nature of charge that is to be established, volume of documentary evidences that is to be relied upon, number of witnesses from both sides to depose and cross examined, general adjournments due to problems of both parties, any other circumstances etc.
It is practically not possible to predict the time frame at this stage.
For more info you can read my blog too at - www.labourlawhub.com
From India, Kolkata
It is practically not possible to predict the time frame at this stage.
For more info you can read my blog too at - www.labourlawhub.com
From India, Kolkata
Immediately on receipt of the complaint aginst any employee show cause notice has to be issued. If the misconduct alleged is serious, suspension pending enquiry alongwith the show cause notice can be issued. Based on the explanation from the charge sheeted employee, further disciplinary actions on award of punishment as detailed in the standing orders or if a domestic enquiry is warranted such letters to be issued. Post completion of the domestic enquiry, if the charges are proved and are of grevious in nature and punishmet of dismissal is to be inflicted, a second show cause notice detailing the proven charges and the proposed punishment has to be issued.
In the case of domestic enquiry matters, there could be no time frame. In other cases it has to be completed as soon as possible otherwise the impact of the disciplinary action will not be felt/seen.
bgramesh, hosur
From India, Vellore
In the case of domestic enquiry matters, there could be no time frame. In other cases it has to be completed as soon as possible otherwise the impact of the disciplinary action will not be felt/seen.
bgramesh, hosur
From India, Vellore
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.
CTC_SALARY_SLIP _FORM_(legal)(1 ).xls
Nominee vs legal heir.pdf
HR-LEGAL FORMS.zip