Penalty 1: Reduction by one stage from Rs.36,180/- to Rs.35,120/- in the time scale of pay of Rs.20,600-46,500 for a period of two years with effect from 01.12.2015. Further, the charged employee will not earn increments of pay during the period of reduction and that on the expiry of this period, the reduction will not have the effect of postponing his future increments of pay.
Penalty 2: Issued on 25.10.2016: Imposing the penalty of withholding of increment for two years without cumulative effect upon charged employee
Penalty 3: Reduction by three stages in the time scale of pay for three years and he will not earn increment of pay during the period of penalty and on expiry of penalty period, the reduction will have effect of postponing the future increment of his pay.
Pay Drawn particulars are as under:-
01.01.2011 - Rs.32,120/-
01.01.2012 - Rs.33,090/-
01.01.2013 - Rs.34,090/-
01.01.2014 - Rs.35,120/-
01.01.2015 - Rs.36,180/-
What shall the fixation of pay if all the penalties are charged on the same employee? Please elucidate with reasons.
From India, Hyderabad
1Penalty 2: Issued on 25.10.2016: Imposing the penalty of withholding of increment for two years without cumulative effect upon charged employee
Penalty 3: Reduction by three stages in the time scale of pay for three years and he will not earn increment of pay during the period of penalty and on expiry of penalty period, the reduction will have effect of postponing the future increment of his pay.
Pay Drawn particulars are as under:-
01.01.2011 - Rs.32,120/-
01.01.2012 - Rs.33,090/-
01.01.2013 - Rs.34,090/-
01.01.2014 - Rs.35,120/-
01.01.2015 - Rs.36,180/-
What shall the fixation of pay if all the penalties are charged on the same employee? Please elucidate with reasons.
From India, Hyderabad
Dear MPPK: Pl give the date of third penalty to work out the effect. It is necessary. The effect of punishment one & two are as follows:
Date Basic Pay Remarks
30.11.15 36160 Before Punishment- Would have earned Rs. 37250 w.e.f. 01.01.16 & 38370 w.e.f 01.01.17 etc
01.12.15 35120 Impact of punishment No.1
01.01.16 35120 Normal date of increment, but not drawn due to punishment no.1
25.10.16 35120 Punishment no.2 imposed but cannot be implemented till punishment no.1 is over as no increment accrues in the meanwhile
01.01.17 35120 Normal date of increment, but not drawn due to punishment no.1
30.11.17 35120 Impact of punishment no.1 is over
01.12.17 38370 As the future increments were allowed & punishment no.2 starts
01.01.18 38370 No increment, effect of punishment no.2
01.01.19 38370 No increment, effect of punishment no.2
01.01.20 39530 Punishment no.2 is without cumulative effect and is over
From India, Mumbai
Date Basic Pay Remarks
30.11.15 36160 Before Punishment- Would have earned Rs. 37250 w.e.f. 01.01.16 & 38370 w.e.f 01.01.17 etc
01.12.15 35120 Impact of punishment No.1
01.01.16 35120 Normal date of increment, but not drawn due to punishment no.1
25.10.16 35120 Punishment no.2 imposed but cannot be implemented till punishment no.1 is over as no increment accrues in the meanwhile
01.01.17 35120 Normal date of increment, but not drawn due to punishment no.1
30.11.17 35120 Impact of punishment no.1 is over
01.12.17 38370 As the future increments were allowed & punishment no.2 starts
01.01.18 38370 No increment, effect of punishment no.2
01.01.19 38370 No increment, effect of punishment no.2
01.01.20 39530 Punishment no.2 is without cumulative effect and is over
From India, Mumbai
Punishment No.2 is without holding increment and the annual increment is on 1st of January. So, I believe the Punishment No.2 should be implemented from 01.01.2017. And, Penalty 1 & 3 are Major and Penalty 2 is Minor.
From India, Hyderabad
From India, Hyderabad
And 3% increment should be fixed at nearest multiples of 10. Hence, 38,390/-, 36,180/-, 39550/- should be the pays respectively.
From India, Hyderabad
From India, Hyderabad
Dear MPPK: Agreed that Punishment No.2 would affect the increment due on 01.01.17. The impact of the three punishments could be as follows:
Date Basic Pay Remarks
30.11.15 36160 Before Punishment- Would have earned Rs. 37250 w.e.f. 01.01.16, 38370 w.e.f 01.01.17 & 39520 w.e.f. 01.01.18 and so on
01.12.15 35120 Impact of punishment No.1
01.01.16 35120 Normal date of increment, but not drawn due to punishment no.1
25.10.16 35120 Punishment no.2 imposed but cannot be implemented till punishment no.1 is over as no increment accrues in the meanwhile
01.01.17 35120 Normal date of increment (No.1), but not drawn due to punishment no.1
03.03.17 32120 Impact of Punishment no.3, is with immediate effect & it takes precedence over punishment no.2
02.03.20 to)
03.03.20 ) 35120 Punishment No.3 is over and punishment no.2 resumes
01.01.21 35120 No increment drawn, 2nd increment withheld as per punishment no.2
01.01.22 37250 All punishments over
The principle is that while reduction is with immediate effect and the impact is felt from the date of issue of order, the withholding of increment is with future effect and comes into play only when the increment accrues
From India, Mumbai
Date Basic Pay Remarks
30.11.15 36160 Before Punishment- Would have earned Rs. 37250 w.e.f. 01.01.16, 38370 w.e.f 01.01.17 & 39520 w.e.f. 01.01.18 and so on
01.12.15 35120 Impact of punishment No.1
01.01.16 35120 Normal date of increment, but not drawn due to punishment no.1
25.10.16 35120 Punishment no.2 imposed but cannot be implemented till punishment no.1 is over as no increment accrues in the meanwhile
01.01.17 35120 Normal date of increment (No.1), but not drawn due to punishment no.1
03.03.17 32120 Impact of Punishment no.3, is with immediate effect & it takes precedence over punishment no.2
02.03.20 to)
03.03.20 ) 35120 Punishment No.3 is over and punishment no.2 resumes
01.01.21 35120 No increment drawn, 2nd increment withheld as per punishment no.2
01.01.22 37250 All punishments over
The principle is that while reduction is with immediate effect and the impact is felt from the date of issue of order, the withholding of increment is with future effect and comes into play only when the increment accrues
From India, Mumbai
I think the Penalty 2 should also be concurrently imposed. If so, the Pay of the C.O. should be as under:-
01.12.2015 to 01.01.2017 - Rs.35,120/- (Penalty 1 in effect & Penalty 2 comes into effect from 01.01.2017)
03.03.2017 to 30.11.2017 - Rs.32,120/- (Penalty 1&2 in effect & Penalty 2 comes into effect from 03.03.2017)
01.12.2017 to 02.03.2020 - Rs.35,120/- (Completion of Penalty 1&2 w.e.f. 01.12.2017 & 01.01.2019 respectively)
03.03.2020 to 31.12.2020 - Rs.36,180/- (Completion of Penalty 3)
What is your thought on this?
From India, Hyderabad
01.12.2015 to 01.01.2017 - Rs.35,120/- (Penalty 1 in effect & Penalty 2 comes into effect from 01.01.2017)
03.03.2017 to 30.11.2017 - Rs.32,120/- (Penalty 1&2 in effect & Penalty 2 comes into effect from 03.03.2017)
01.12.2017 to 02.03.2020 - Rs.35,120/- (Completion of Penalty 1&2 w.e.f. 01.12.2017 & 01.01.2019 respectively)
03.03.2020 to 31.12.2020 - Rs.36,180/- (Completion of Penalty 3)
What is your thought on this?
From India, Hyderabad
Dear MPPK: Upto 01.12.17 there is no difference in pay fixation. If as on 01.12.17 the basic pay is enhanced to Rs. 35120 , that means he has been restored three increments which I think would not be in line with Punishment No.3. This order specifies reduction by three stages in the time scale of pay for three years (i.e from Rs. 35120 to Rs. 32120) and he will not earn increment of pay during the period of penalty (so no addition) and on expiry of penalty period, the reduction will have effect of postponing the future increment of his pay . So till the expiry of the three year period i.e. upto 02.03.20 he has to remain at 32120 and thereafter will come back to the pre-reduction basic pay (Rs.35120) . Moreover, the punishment orders are not specifying that they will run concurrently, so as has not served the 2nd punishment in full while the third punishment is imposed, he has to serve the remaining period of punishment no.2 (i.e., from 03.03.20 to 31.12.20 at Rs. 35120/)
From India, Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Dear Friend,
You have not mentioned the cadre of the employee, you have also not mentioned as to how and why these many number of punishment has been awarded.
Is he a workmen or management staff.
To me the whole case appears to be dicey without complete information. If oit is challenged in the court of law, it will not stand the scrutiny.
Warm Regards
Bharat Gera
HR Consultant
9322404765
From India, Thane
You have not mentioned the cadre of the employee, you have also not mentioned as to how and why these many number of punishment has been awarded.
Is he a workmen or management staff.
To me the whole case appears to be dicey without complete information. If oit is challenged in the court of law, it will not stand the scrutiny.
Warm Regards
Bharat Gera
HR Consultant
9322404765
From India, Thane
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.
ESI-Single-Chal lan-for-Main-co de&Multiple-Sub -code.pdf
Multiple.xls