how can we issue a show cause notice for committing a fraud which was detected after he left the organisation and joined another organisation.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Dominic,
Do you have incontrovertible evidence of the fraud? If yes, then you may lodge an FIR against the employee. Secondly, you may also conduct the domestic inquiry.
Please note that lodging an FIR and conducting a domestic inquiry are two independent actions. Police investigation and domestic inquiry can both proceed concurrently.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
8032Do you have incontrovertible evidence of the fraud? If yes, then you may lodge an FIR against the employee. Secondly, you may also conduct the domestic inquiry.
Please note that lodging an FIR and conducting a domestic inquiry are two independent actions. Police investigation and domestic inquiry can both proceed concurrently.
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Franklin,
You can file an FIR for fraud if it falls under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) but not for a domestic inquiry (as domestic inquiries serve no purpose) since the employer-employee relationship does not exist. Now, he is an outsider who committed fraud when he was an employee.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You can file an FIR for fraud if it falls under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) but not for a domestic inquiry (as domestic inquiries serve no purpose) since the employer-employee relationship does not exist. Now, he is an outsider who committed fraud when he was an employee.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Vivian,
Conducting the domestic enquiry has its own importance on two counts. These are as below.
Firstly, imagine for a while that the company orders a domestic enquiry and tells the accused to depose before it. The accused appears and in the enquiry, the misconduct of the employee is established. Management tells the employee to refund the money to the company with interest. The accused accepts it and pays also. Therefore, the matter gets settled. Thereafter, whether to pursue the case through civil court is the management's call. No company would be interested in doing that.
What I have written above may sound a little utopian; nevertheless, we must consider it as one of the possibilities.
The second scenario is as below. Suppose in the domestic enquiry the misconduct is proved. However, the court acquits the accused. In that case, should the court verdict override the domestic enquiry? No. Rather, there are higher court verdicts wherein the high court has held that findings of a domestic enquiry override the court ruling. You may check the following link wherein one such verdict is given by the Hon'ble Madras Court:
M.M. Rubber Company Ltd. vs Presiding Officer (Addl.) Labour ... on 10 September 1985
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
Dear Franklin,
You can file an FIR for fraud if it attracts the IPC but not a domestic enquiry (domestic enquiry serves no purpose) since the employer and employee relationship doesn't exist. Now, he is an outsider who has committed fraud when he was an employee.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Conducting the domestic enquiry has its own importance on two counts. These are as below.
Firstly, imagine for a while that the company orders a domestic enquiry and tells the accused to depose before it. The accused appears and in the enquiry, the misconduct of the employee is established. Management tells the employee to refund the money to the company with interest. The accused accepts it and pays also. Therefore, the matter gets settled. Thereafter, whether to pursue the case through civil court is the management's call. No company would be interested in doing that.
What I have written above may sound a little utopian; nevertheless, we must consider it as one of the possibilities.
The second scenario is as below. Suppose in the domestic enquiry the misconduct is proved. However, the court acquits the accused. In that case, should the court verdict override the domestic enquiry? No. Rather, there are higher court verdicts wherein the high court has held that findings of a domestic enquiry override the court ruling. You may check the following link wherein one such verdict is given by the Hon'ble Madras Court:
M.M. Rubber Company Ltd. vs Presiding Officer (Addl.) Labour ... on 10 September 1985
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
Dear Franklin,
You can file an FIR for fraud if it attracts the IPC but not a domestic enquiry (domestic enquiry serves no purpose) since the employer and employee relationship doesn't exist. Now, he is an outsider who has committed fraud when he was an employee.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear All,
Thank you all for your valuable suggestions. I wanted to inquire whether a company can include a clause in its terms and conditions stating that at the time of joining, it is made clear to the employee that even if they resign from the organization and join a new one in the future, the company reserves the right to take action against them for any discrepancies reported or observed, even after they have left the company.
Thank you.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thank you all for your valuable suggestions. I wanted to inquire whether a company can include a clause in its terms and conditions stating that at the time of joining, it is made clear to the employee that even if they resign from the organization and join a new one in the future, the company reserves the right to take action against them for any discrepancies reported or observed, even after they have left the company.
Thank you.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Dominicfranklin,
Can you please clarify whether your query is related to an actual situation that you are currently facing or if you are looking to frame your policies to cover future situations?
Please note that both situations are different.
Dinesh's and Vivian's suggestions cover the former scenario.
If your intent or reason for this thread is the latter (to frame your policies to cover future situations), then I think you are only exposing your overall relieving policies, practices, and systems, or the lack thereof.
Any employee being relieved is expected to go through processes for no-dues, material handover, etc., which surely would need to include systems that track fraud as a general/regular feature within the company. Hence, if you wish to include the clause you mentioned as part of the joining formalities, you could open yourself or the company to a situation of mistrust or distrust right from the word 'go'. This doesn't bode well for any employer-employee relationship, right? And don't be surprised if you find some good joinees refusing, dropping out altogether, or leaving sooner than later.
Also, what's the timeframe that you wish to cover? If it's perpetual or infinite, then surely you need to be prepared for a legal situation later on.
Except in positions that would tend to bring out such fraud situations after relieving (like finance, where such situations arise just before submission of audited results to MCA, etc.), it's always better to tighten the internal systems and processes.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Can you please clarify whether your query is related to an actual situation that you are currently facing or if you are looking to frame your policies to cover future situations?
Please note that both situations are different.
Dinesh's and Vivian's suggestions cover the former scenario.
If your intent or reason for this thread is the latter (to frame your policies to cover future situations), then I think you are only exposing your overall relieving policies, practices, and systems, or the lack thereof.
Any employee being relieved is expected to go through processes for no-dues, material handover, etc., which surely would need to include systems that track fraud as a general/regular feature within the company. Hence, if you wish to include the clause you mentioned as part of the joining formalities, you could open yourself or the company to a situation of mistrust or distrust right from the word 'go'. This doesn't bode well for any employer-employee relationship, right? And don't be surprised if you find some good joinees refusing, dropping out altogether, or leaving sooner than later.
Also, what's the timeframe that you wish to cover? If it's perpetual or infinite, then surely you need to be prepared for a legal situation later on.
Except in positions that would tend to bring out such fraud situations after relieving (like finance, where such situations arise just before submission of audited results to MCA, etc.), it's always better to tighten the internal systems and processes.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Dominic,
You are raising queries in instalments. You could have given complete scenario. As Sateesh has asked, does the query relate to some past incident or do you want to take precaution for future?
The unsaid part of your latest post is that you have weak systems and processes and frauds take lot of time for their detection. Rather than telling employees that they are liable for disciplinary action in case if some fraud is detected even after their exit from the company, it is worthwhile to do complete scrutiny of the records before clearing them. Why not to take precautions while the employees are in system?
What about your internal auditors? What about your external auditors? Are they not accountable if the fraud is not detected? Take the case of Satyam Computers. Recently ICAI has taken action against the Chartered Accountants for their faulty audit.
Insertion of clause in the appointment letter is nothing but open manifestation of your own weakness. If the fraud is detected, then whether the employee is on the roll or not, FIR can be lodged. However, raison d'ętre of management science is to avoid these contingencies. It appears that a time has come for your company to take a leaf out of this science!
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You are raising queries in instalments. You could have given complete scenario. As Sateesh has asked, does the query relate to some past incident or do you want to take precaution for future?
The unsaid part of your latest post is that you have weak systems and processes and frauds take lot of time for their detection. Rather than telling employees that they are liable for disciplinary action in case if some fraud is detected even after their exit from the company, it is worthwhile to do complete scrutiny of the records before clearing them. Why not to take precautions while the employees are in system?
What about your internal auditors? What about your external auditors? Are they not accountable if the fraud is not detected? Take the case of Satyam Computers. Recently ICAI has taken action against the Chartered Accountants for their faulty audit.
Insertion of clause in the appointment letter is nothing but open manifestation of your own weakness. If the fraud is detected, then whether the employee is on the roll or not, FIR can be lodged. However, raison d'ętre of management science is to avoid these contingencies. It appears that a time has come for your company to take a leaf out of this science!
Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please may I take this opportunity to request those posing questions to give the complete scenario at the outset to save time for experts. It also helps to give precise answers instead of providing answers based on assumptions.
TS has raised apt questions, and Dinesh has given sound suggestions.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
TS has raised apt questions, and Dinesh has given sound suggestions.
From United Kingdom
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
What I can understand from this forum is that it is a platform for learning and not for pushing thoughts. I was only trying to see if any such clause could be added in the terms and conditions, as there are many dimensions to a situation, and one can only come up with a solution based on the situation.
Anyways, thanks to all for your valuable suggestions.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Anyways, thanks to all for your valuable suggestions.
From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Dominic Franklin,
You are BOTH right AND wrong.
RIGHT when you say '...many dimensions to a situation and one can only come up with a solution based on the situation' & WRONG when you say '...it is a platform for learning and not pushing thoughts'.
Every situation is unique with its own set of sub-situations embedded within—hence even though at first glance there could be similarities, they surely would never be 'identical'. You got it right with this aspect of human interaction.
As regards CiteHR being a "platform for learning and not pushing thoughts", please note that there have been many instances—just visit the earlier threads—where CiteHR acted as a sounding board for new ideas & practices before they are implemented by members.
You said it right...possibly without realizing...when you used the words "pushing thoughts". Yes—CiteHR is NOT a platform/forum for 'pushing' thoughts. It's a platform/forum for discussing (or if I may use the words 'sounding-out') new/better ideas or solutions for existing or possible anticipated situations. I guess you can see the difference between the two of them.
When a member wishes to sound-out the forum for possible solutions for future situations, it's imperative that this aspect is mentioned clearly—since the way one looks at future situations WILL NECESSARILY HAVE TO INCLUDE a much larger canvas of possibilities before any suggestions can be offered.
In human relations/interactions, there surely are no 'hypothetical' situations on a permanent basis—what's hypothetical today CAN be realistic tomorrow...and vice-versa.
Hope you get the point.
All the Best.
Rgds,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You are BOTH right AND wrong.
RIGHT when you say '...many dimensions to a situation and one can only come up with a solution based on the situation' & WRONG when you say '...it is a platform for learning and not pushing thoughts'.
Every situation is unique with its own set of sub-situations embedded within—hence even though at first glance there could be similarities, they surely would never be 'identical'. You got it right with this aspect of human interaction.
As regards CiteHR being a "platform for learning and not pushing thoughts", please note that there have been many instances—just visit the earlier threads—where CiteHR acted as a sounding board for new ideas & practices before they are implemented by members.
You said it right...possibly without realizing...when you used the words "pushing thoughts". Yes—CiteHR is NOT a platform/forum for 'pushing' thoughts. It's a platform/forum for discussing (or if I may use the words 'sounding-out') new/better ideas or solutions for existing or possible anticipated situations. I guess you can see the difference between the two of them.
When a member wishes to sound-out the forum for possible solutions for future situations, it's imperative that this aspect is mentioned clearly—since the way one looks at future situations WILL NECESSARILY HAVE TO INCLUDE a much larger canvas of possibilities before any suggestions can be offered.
In human relations/interactions, there surely are no 'hypothetical' situations on a permanent basis—what's hypothetical today CAN be realistic tomorrow...and vice-versa.
Hope you get the point.
All the Best.
Rgds,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
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.