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 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 an increment of pay during the period of penalty. On the expiry of the penalty period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing the future increment of his pay.
Pay Drawn particulars are as follows:
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 be the fixation of pay if all the penalties are charged on the same employee? Please elucidate with reasons.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
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 an increment of pay during the period of penalty. On the expiry of the penalty period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing the future increment of his pay.
Pay Drawn particulars are as follows:
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 be the fixation of pay if all the penalties are charged on the same employee? Please elucidate with reasons.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear MPPK,
Please provide the date of the third penalty to assess its impact. This information is crucial. The effects of the first and second penalties are outlined below:
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 until 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 Future increments allowed and 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
Thank you.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please provide the date of the third penalty to assess its impact. This information is crucial. The effects of the first and second penalties are outlined below:
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 until 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 Future increments allowed and 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
Thank you.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Punishment No. 2 is without holding an increment, and the annual increment is on the 1st of January. Therefore, I believe Punishment No. 2 should be implemented from 01.01.2017. Additionally, Penalties 1 and 3 are Major, while Penalty 2 is Minor.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
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
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
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 the order, the withholding of increment is with future effect and comes into play only when the increment accrues.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
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 the order, the withholding of increment is with future effect and comes into play only when the increment accrues.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I think the Penalty 2 should also be concurrently imposed. If so, the pay of the C.O. should be as follows:
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 are your thoughts on this?
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
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 are your thoughts on this?
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear MPPK,
Up to 01.12.17, there is no difference in pay fixation. If as of 01.12.17 the basic pay is enhanced to Rs. 35,120, that means he has been restored three increments, which I think would not be in line with Punishment No.3. This order specifies a reduction by three stages in the time scale of pay for three years (i.e., from Rs. 35,120 to Rs. 32,120), and he will not earn an increment of pay during the period of penalty (so no addition). On the expiry of the penalty period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing the future increment of his pay. So, till the expiry of the three-year period, i.e., up to 02.03.20, he has to remain at 32,120, and thereafter will come back to the pre-reduction basic pay (Rs. 35,120).
Moreover, the punishment orders do not specify that they will run concurrently. As he has not served the second 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. 35,120).
Kind regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Up to 01.12.17, there is no difference in pay fixation. If as of 01.12.17 the basic pay is enhanced to Rs. 35,120, that means he has been restored three increments, which I think would not be in line with Punishment No.3. This order specifies a reduction by three stages in the time scale of pay for three years (i.e., from Rs. 35,120 to Rs. 32,120), and he will not earn an increment of pay during the period of penalty (so no addition). On the expiry of the penalty period, the reduction will have the effect of postponing the future increment of his pay. So, till the expiry of the three-year period, i.e., up to 02.03.20, he has to remain at 32,120, and thereafter will come back to the pre-reduction basic pay (Rs. 35,120).
Moreover, the punishment orders do not specify that they will run concurrently. As he has not served the second 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. 35,120).
Kind regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Friend,
You have not mentioned the cadre of the employee, and you have also not mentioned how and why this many number of punishments have been awarded. Is he a workman or management staff? To me, the whole case appears to be dicey without complete information. If it is challenged in the court of law, it will not stand the scrutiny.
Warm Regards,
Bharat Gera
HR Consultant
9322404765
From India, Thane
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You have not mentioned the cadre of the employee, and you have also not mentioned how and why this many number of punishments have been awarded. Is he a workman or management staff? To me, the whole case appears to be dicey without complete information. If it is challenged in the court of law, it will not stand the scrutiny.
Warm Regards,
Bharat Gera
HR Consultant
9322404765
From India, Thane
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.