This thread is specifically about the payment of subsistence allowance only.
The questions which are being put are with the very clear understanding that the charges mentioned in the chargesheet and its reply and other procedures and penalty which the employee may or may not face depending on the fact that whether guilty or not - is entirely not connected with this issue.
After a strong follow-up this month, a part of the subsistence allowance reached her, that also after sending a part of this forum's views to the P & HR by mail.
When it is viewed as the right for survival and basically it is not only the right as an employee but also about the constitutional right of a person to survive and exist.
But still, my question is if a person who was placed under suspension at least 6 to 7 months back and has to wait and fight for this basic right of survival after 6 months even though there are clear service conditions about what is to be paid when someone is under suspension and what are all the deductions to be made, what is the recourse available?
What is Natural Justice! It is the protection against arbitrary exercise of power by ensuring fair play with the following principles.
(1) Audi alteram partem (Latin for, hear the other side): no accused, or a person directly affected by a decision, shall be condemned unless given a full chance to prepare and submit his or her case and rebuttal to the opposing party's arguments;
(2) Nemo judex in causa sua (Latin for, no man a judge in his own case): no decision is valid if it was influenced by any financial consideration or other interest or bias of the decision-maker.
These principles apply to decisions of all governmental agencies and tribunals, and judgments of all courts, which may be declared to be of having no effect (ultra vires) if found in contravention of natural justice.
The act of the employer withholding the subsistence allowance or appropriating it in such a way that the employee could not access it thereby putting the employee into such a difficult financial condition which basically affects any working person adversely, thereby creating a very disturbing effect on any employee who is yet to be proved guilty thereby putting the delinquent employee in such a position that the employee cannot prepare for her/his case and rebut the opposing party's arguments. When there is a case to be fought and decided why there is a punishment before. Is this not against Natural Justice? Can this not be challenged?
The point of contention is non-payment of subsistence till date thereby not granting the employee the basic NATURAL JUSTICE and RIGHT FOR SURVIVAL. What is the limitation time for this - if the employee wants to take up this matter after the enquiry and other procedures are over.?
The very purpose of this query is not just getting subsistence allowance but to bring to notice of everyone involved about what steps should be ensured so that the delinquent employees should also be given a fair opportunity to present their part without getting bowed down by the pressures created by the unemployed/unpaid condition.
'NIRBHAYA's fight for survival was motivation for the fight against certain social immoralities which would now continue even though she lost her battle of life and likewise let this case of fight for survival of my colleague even though she had suffered (but survived till date because of the support of the strong family) be a motivational factor for the modus operandi of such cases where the punishment period had started even before the presentation of the case and the hearings.
If there are any contradictions/impoliteness in my post - please bring that to my notice.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
The questions which are being put are with the very clear understanding that the charges mentioned in the chargesheet and its reply and other procedures and penalty which the employee may or may not face depending on the fact that whether guilty or not - is entirely not connected with this issue.
After a strong follow-up this month, a part of the subsistence allowance reached her, that also after sending a part of this forum's views to the P & HR by mail.
When it is viewed as the right for survival and basically it is not only the right as an employee but also about the constitutional right of a person to survive and exist.
But still, my question is if a person who was placed under suspension at least 6 to 7 months back and has to wait and fight for this basic right of survival after 6 months even though there are clear service conditions about what is to be paid when someone is under suspension and what are all the deductions to be made, what is the recourse available?
What is Natural Justice! It is the protection against arbitrary exercise of power by ensuring fair play with the following principles.
(1) Audi alteram partem (Latin for, hear the other side): no accused, or a person directly affected by a decision, shall be condemned unless given a full chance to prepare and submit his or her case and rebuttal to the opposing party's arguments;
(2) Nemo judex in causa sua (Latin for, no man a judge in his own case): no decision is valid if it was influenced by any financial consideration or other interest or bias of the decision-maker.
These principles apply to decisions of all governmental agencies and tribunals, and judgments of all courts, which may be declared to be of having no effect (ultra vires) if found in contravention of natural justice.
The act of the employer withholding the subsistence allowance or appropriating it in such a way that the employee could not access it thereby putting the employee into such a difficult financial condition which basically affects any working person adversely, thereby creating a very disturbing effect on any employee who is yet to be proved guilty thereby putting the delinquent employee in such a position that the employee cannot prepare for her/his case and rebut the opposing party's arguments. When there is a case to be fought and decided why there is a punishment before. Is this not against Natural Justice? Can this not be challenged?
The point of contention is non-payment of subsistence till date thereby not granting the employee the basic NATURAL JUSTICE and RIGHT FOR SURVIVAL. What is the limitation time for this - if the employee wants to take up this matter after the enquiry and other procedures are over.?
The very purpose of this query is not just getting subsistence allowance but to bring to notice of everyone involved about what steps should be ensured so that the delinquent employees should also be given a fair opportunity to present their part without getting bowed down by the pressures created by the unemployed/unpaid condition.
'NIRBHAYA's fight for survival was motivation for the fight against certain social immoralities which would now continue even though she lost her battle of life and likewise let this case of fight for survival of my colleague even though she had suffered (but survived till date because of the support of the strong family) be a motivational factor for the modus operandi of such cases where the punishment period had started even before the presentation of the case and the hearings.
If there are any contradictions/impoliteness in my post - please bring that to my notice.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
A part of the subsistence allowance is now received after strong follow-up. This could have been done by making an application immediately after the completion of the wage/salary period when the subsistence allowance was not paid.
Now, make another application to get the entitled subsistence allowance as per eligibility. It seems that the employee has been under suspension for about 6-7 months. Hence, the rate of the subsistence allowance is also now increased after 3 months. If not paid, inform the employer that for getting the eligible subsistence allowance, the employee is approaching the competent authority (Labour Court).
Any person who is aggrieved may make use of the legal remedies available by approaching the appropriate forum for justice. The law cannot help those who are not diligent in exercising their rights.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
78Now, make another application to get the entitled subsistence allowance as per eligibility. It seems that the employee has been under suspension for about 6-7 months. Hence, the rate of the subsistence allowance is also now increased after 3 months. If not paid, inform the employer that for getting the eligible subsistence allowance, the employee is approaching the competent authority (Labour Court).
Any person who is aggrieved may make use of the legal remedies available by approaching the appropriate forum for justice. The law cannot help those who are not diligent in exercising their rights.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Latest in this Thread,
The fight is still ongoing without any legal actions being taken to date. A claim for the subsistence underpayment in the initial months has been sent, and now it has been acknowledged, with eligible perks being partially paid. Thanks to the forum and its support.
But I am certainly thinking at this point of time - when an employee is placed under suspension, usually the situation escalates if the employee chooses to go to the Labor court - Does the employee have the right or limitation to fight out or at least challenge the "conduct of the organization during the period of suspension" after the inquiry is over or if the employee decides to leave the organization?
Can legal experts clarify in this regard?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The fight is still ongoing without any legal actions being taken to date. A claim for the subsistence underpayment in the initial months has been sent, and now it has been acknowledged, with eligible perks being partially paid. Thanks to the forum and its support.
But I am certainly thinking at this point of time - when an employee is placed under suspension, usually the situation escalates if the employee chooses to go to the Labor court - Does the employee have the right or limitation to fight out or at least challenge the "conduct of the organization during the period of suspension" after the inquiry is over or if the employee decides to leave the organization?
Can legal experts clarify in this regard?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the above reply, you have expressed concern about approaching the Labour Court. You mentioned that the employee under suspension was not paid a subsistence allowance for about 6-7 months. I suggested approaching the Labour Court, as provided by law, to obtain the subsistence allowance that the employer had failed to provide.
If the employee is content without the subsistence allowance, then there is no need to go to the Labour Court to seek it. My suggestion is straightforward. For those with grievances, there is a grievance redressal system in India. Whether to utilize it or not is up to the aggrieved individual.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
If the employee is content without the subsistence allowance, then there is no need to go to the Labour Court to seek it. My suggestion is straightforward. For those with grievances, there is a grievance redressal system in India. Whether to utilize it or not is up to the aggrieved individual.
From India, Madras
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.