Hi iam working as a cashier in public sector bank. Two months back a theft was happened in my atm. For that incident management suspended me. But my mistake was not there.Only one reason they told that you are a cashier on that day..This is very bad. How to get stay from court? Kindly tell the details
From India, Bengaluru
From India, Bengaluru
Theft at ATM and you were suspended. What is written as reason for suspension More details are required for proper answer
From India, Pune
3131From India, Pune
The reason for suspension is "iam the head cashier on that day and iam holding the keys with accountant "accountant also got suspended .But Atm keys is with accountant only.That is my point.Unnecessarily i got suspended
From India, Bengaluru
From India, Bengaluru
Ok
Did they give you any show cause notice?
Was police case registered?
Was there any visible theft from ATM?
Who discovered the theft?
Was there any cash shortage without visible sign of robbery?
Pl give full details for proper answer.
Is any enquiry in progress presently?
From India, Pune
Did they give you any show cause notice?
Was police case registered?
Was there any visible theft from ATM?
Who discovered the theft?
Was there any cash shortage without visible sign of robbery?
Pl give full details for proper answer.
Is any enquiry in progress presently?
From India, Pune
Dear friend,
A Public Sector Bank, being an authority under article 12 of the Constitution of India, is amenable to the Writ Jurisdiction and therefore you can move the High Court of the State. But the problem is that consequent on the loss of public money by theft only, both the double-lock officers of the Bank responsible for the ATMs were placed under suspension pending enquiry by the Bank or investigation by the Police as per the procedure. Therefore, it would be doubtful whether the Court would be inclined to stay the orders of suspension at this early stage if it is passed by the competent authority. Well, chances are there for the Court to give directions to complete the enquiry within a specified time-limit. Better seek the advice of a Senior Advocate of the High Court.
From India, Salem
A Public Sector Bank, being an authority under article 12 of the Constitution of India, is amenable to the Writ Jurisdiction and therefore you can move the High Court of the State. But the problem is that consequent on the loss of public money by theft only, both the double-lock officers of the Bank responsible for the ATMs were placed under suspension pending enquiry by the Bank or investigation by the Police as per the procedure. Therefore, it would be doubtful whether the Court would be inclined to stay the orders of suspension at this early stage if it is passed by the competent authority. Well, chances are there for the Court to give directions to complete the enquiry within a specified time-limit. Better seek the advice of a Senior Advocate of the High Court.
From India, Salem
Dear Mr Umakanatan,
Your answer is absolutely right.
The query is totally short on details.
Suppose the ATM theft was one of breaking open and removing cash?
Then this gentleman has some chance of trying for a stay.
I really wonder why querist has not answered my query asking for proper details so far?
From India, Pune
Your answer is absolutely right.
The query is totally short on details.
Suppose the ATM theft was one of breaking open and removing cash?
Then this gentleman has some chance of trying for a stay.
I really wonder why querist has not answered my query asking for proper details so far?
From India, Pune
Dear Mr.Rao,
Your presumptions are exactly correct and the final question following your astonishment is apt. As far as I know, for any theft of Bank's money kept in the ATM by burglary, the concerned employees of the Bank would not be proceeded against. Normally group pf ATMs would be under the scrutiny of a monitoring system and only the employees in charge will have access to the monitoring system to watch the entire transactions through such every ATM and load them with currency as and when required. Therefore, if short fall in cash in between successive ATM replenishment is noticed then normally the employees concerned would be held responsible for they alone would have the key for the machines and know the passwords if outside agencies are not engaged for such work. Though the single key was with the cashier and the questioner, as admitted by himself, was not present at the time of the particular successive replenishment of currency, he, as the Head Cashier, can not disown his joint responsibility for the monetary loss. Moreover, the short fall in cash might have been detected by the Manager and hence his suspension might be. Based on such presumable facts only, I gave my reply as above.
From India, Salem
Your presumptions are exactly correct and the final question following your astonishment is apt. As far as I know, for any theft of Bank's money kept in the ATM by burglary, the concerned employees of the Bank would not be proceeded against. Normally group pf ATMs would be under the scrutiny of a monitoring system and only the employees in charge will have access to the monitoring system to watch the entire transactions through such every ATM and load them with currency as and when required. Therefore, if short fall in cash in between successive ATM replenishment is noticed then normally the employees concerned would be held responsible for they alone would have the key for the machines and know the passwords if outside agencies are not engaged for such work. Though the single key was with the cashier and the questioner, as admitted by himself, was not present at the time of the particular successive replenishment of currency, he, as the Head Cashier, can not disown his joint responsibility for the monetary loss. Moreover, the short fall in cash might have been detected by the Manager and hence his suspension might be. Based on such presumable facts only, I gave my reply as above.
From India, Salem
In the narrated circumstances of the matter, stay on suspension is rather difficult. A stay is granted if the following three tests are all answered in your favour
1. Prima facie case: The fact that the keys were with the Accountant would be a factor in your favour but the management would have their side of the story. The Rules providing for suspension is a major factor in favour of suspension.
2. Balance of convenience: The management has a better case here as they can stress on the contention that the presence of suspended employee at work place would vitiate the process and prejudicially affect the progress of inquiry .
3. Irreparable injury : is more in favour of continuance of suspension.The suspended employee continues to be in service and is entitled to subsistence allowance.
This legal position was shared, not to dissuade you from trying your luck but only to forewarn you of the likely scenario.
Notwithstanding my comments, you may consult a senior advocate with all papers and the applicable rule position as suggested by Shri Umakanthan sir and decide accordingly.
From India, Mumbai
1. Prima facie case: The fact that the keys were with the Accountant would be a factor in your favour but the management would have their side of the story. The Rules providing for suspension is a major factor in favour of suspension.
2. Balance of convenience: The management has a better case here as they can stress on the contention that the presence of suspended employee at work place would vitiate the process and prejudicially affect the progress of inquiry .
3. Irreparable injury : is more in favour of continuance of suspension.The suspended employee continues to be in service and is entitled to subsistence allowance.
This legal position was shared, not to dissuade you from trying your luck but only to forewarn you of the likely scenario.
Notwithstanding my comments, you may consult a senior advocate with all papers and the applicable rule position as suggested by Shri Umakanthan sir and decide accordingly.
From India, Mumbai
The seniors have apprised you of the correct legal position about suspension. It is very difficult to stay suspension in t's early stage as the bank can suspend an employee pending investigation also as the service rules. So probably it is better to await the investigation report if at all any investigation has been ordered. If the bank does not intend to order any investigation but suspended you merely on some prima facie assumptions and you have evidence contrary to it and if you can prove extraneous factors like bias or haste in arriving at such conclusion, you can, as Mr.Umaknathan said, approach the appropriate High Court for stay.
However you can try certain departmental remedies as under before taking a considered decision to move High Court.
1)The authority suspending you, can also revoke the suspension on an application made by the employees so suspended with convincing grounds. So you can try this first.
2) If he declines your application, you can appeal to the authority higher than him normally who acts appellate authority under the rules of discipline to review the decision made by the lower authority, no matter even if the rule are silent on this remedy.
3) If both remedies fail, you can approach the High Court.You need to convince the court the order suffers from defect apparent on the face of it.
B.Saikumar
HR & Labour Relations Adviser
Navi Mubai
From India, Mumbai
However you can try certain departmental remedies as under before taking a considered decision to move High Court.
1)The authority suspending you, can also revoke the suspension on an application made by the employees so suspended with convincing grounds. So you can try this first.
2) If he declines your application, you can appeal to the authority higher than him normally who acts appellate authority under the rules of discipline to review the decision made by the lower authority, no matter even if the rule are silent on this remedy.
3) If both remedies fail, you can approach the High Court.You need to convince the court the order suffers from defect apparent on the face of it.
B.Saikumar
HR & Labour Relations Adviser
Navi Mubai
From India, Mumbai
dear friend,
This one statement 'the theft has happened in my ATM', clearly indicate that the responsibility and authority rest on you, what ever the happenings occur at the particular ATM. Unless you prove the happenings to show the theft was beyond your control, the suspension stands till investigations over. Prima facie you have to prove that the responsibilities do not fall over you and cover the theft in a way you were not responsible. So, examine your responsibilities in the matter and get clarity before representing the case in court.
From India, Arcot
This one statement 'the theft has happened in my ATM', clearly indicate that the responsibility and authority rest on you, what ever the happenings occur at the particular ATM. Unless you prove the happenings to show the theft was beyond your control, the suspension stands till investigations over. Prima facie you have to prove that the responsibilities do not fall over you and cover the theft in a way you were not responsible. So, examine your responsibilities in the matter and get clarity before representing the case in court.
From India, Arcot
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.
Stay Interview.pdf
Stay Interviews.ppt