In a government organization, a departmental inquiry is underway against a senior officer, and the charged officer has been issued a charge sheet. Currently, the inquiry report has been submitted by the investigating officer, but the decision is pending with the disciplinary authority. The charges are very serious, challenging the integrity of the charged officer. Suspension was not implemented during the inquiry due to negligence on the part of senior management.
Presently, the charged officer is disrupting departmental work and threatening everyone to involve him in all tasks, as the decision from the disciplinary authority is still pending.
I am seeking guidance on the involvement of the charged officer until the inquiry is concluded.
Regards,
Priya
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1Presently, the charged officer is disrupting departmental work and threatening everyone to involve him in all tasks, as the decision from the disciplinary authority is still pending.
I am seeking guidance on the involvement of the charged officer until the inquiry is concluded.
Regards,
Priya
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Priya,
As of now, certain grave charges are still pending against the so-called senior officer as the matter is yet to be disposed of by the Disciplinary Authority. Despite the charges and the departmental inquiry into the charges, the delinquent official was not placed under suspension due to some negligence on the part of the senior management. Now the delinquent is interfering with the departmental work and threatening other employees to involve him all the works. Based on your own perception about the above facts, you desire to restrict the involvement of the delinquent in departmental works till the disposal of the D.P pending against him, and this is what all could I infer from your post.
At the outset itself, you have admitted that the establishment is a Government Organization. But there is no mention of whether it is a government department coming under any particular ministry or a public sector undertaking. In the latter case, it would have its own service regulations, including matters of disciplinary control. Viewed from this backdrop, you have leveled three allegations - (1) against the management of being negligent in not placing the delinquent under suspension pending inquiry though charges of misconduct were framed against him (2) against the Disciplinary Authority of being lax in expeditiously disposing of the matter even after receipt of the inquiry findings and (3) against the delinquent himself of unnecessarily meddling with all the departmental works and threatening the other employees.
The possible educated guess one can make out of your post is that you are one among the aggrieved employees by the threat of the delinquent and you are of the impression that there is undue favoritism being shown to the individual.
In the first place, it is the gravity of the charges and the sole discretion of the top management to place an employee under suspension pending inquiry. One cannot question it. Secondly, when the charges are so grave, naturally the Disciplinary Authority should have to be more cautious in appreciating the findings of the inquiry officer with reference to the documentary and oral evidence and the arguments advanced on behalf of the delinquent, and as such, the delay might be reasonable. Thirdly, because of the pending D.P against the delinquent, the official status and responsibilities of the individual stand unaffected, and his demand for his involvement in the works as a senior officer cannot be found fault with.
Therefore, in my opinion, the only option before the affected employees like yourself is bringing the matter to the notice of the higher authority in case he exceeds his official limits of control and supervision, and subordinates cannot belittle a superior in the normal discharge of his duties just because he is facing some charges.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As of now, certain grave charges are still pending against the so-called senior officer as the matter is yet to be disposed of by the Disciplinary Authority. Despite the charges and the departmental inquiry into the charges, the delinquent official was not placed under suspension due to some negligence on the part of the senior management. Now the delinquent is interfering with the departmental work and threatening other employees to involve him all the works. Based on your own perception about the above facts, you desire to restrict the involvement of the delinquent in departmental works till the disposal of the D.P pending against him, and this is what all could I infer from your post.
At the outset itself, you have admitted that the establishment is a Government Organization. But there is no mention of whether it is a government department coming under any particular ministry or a public sector undertaking. In the latter case, it would have its own service regulations, including matters of disciplinary control. Viewed from this backdrop, you have leveled three allegations - (1) against the management of being negligent in not placing the delinquent under suspension pending inquiry though charges of misconduct were framed against him (2) against the Disciplinary Authority of being lax in expeditiously disposing of the matter even after receipt of the inquiry findings and (3) against the delinquent himself of unnecessarily meddling with all the departmental works and threatening the other employees.
The possible educated guess one can make out of your post is that you are one among the aggrieved employees by the threat of the delinquent and you are of the impression that there is undue favoritism being shown to the individual.
In the first place, it is the gravity of the charges and the sole discretion of the top management to place an employee under suspension pending inquiry. One cannot question it. Secondly, when the charges are so grave, naturally the Disciplinary Authority should have to be more cautious in appreciating the findings of the inquiry officer with reference to the documentary and oral evidence and the arguments advanced on behalf of the delinquent, and as such, the delay might be reasonable. Thirdly, because of the pending D.P against the delinquent, the official status and responsibilities of the individual stand unaffected, and his demand for his involvement in the works as a senior officer cannot be found fault with.
Therefore, in my opinion, the only option before the affected employees like yourself is bringing the matter to the notice of the higher authority in case he exceeds his official limits of control and supervision, and subordinates cannot belittle a superior in the normal discharge of his duties just because he is facing some charges.
From India, Salem
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The act of "threatening" co-workers, colleagues, or other employed persons during duty hours while at the workplace is a very grave act of misconduct. It is a fit case for the employer or management to suspend that particular employee under suspension pending inquiry. An essential step in this process is to issue another charge sheet or show cause notice to the said employee first. Immediately upon issuing and receiving the said CS/SC notice, the suspension-pending inquiry letter should be issued. The suspended employee should be asked to surrender the work/office entry permit, and at the entry gate, security personnel should ensure that his/her entry into workplace premises is disallowed.
Employers in India are never in a helpless or hapless position unless by their own volition. The safety and personal security of all other employees and individuals should be of high priority and supreme importance. Failing to uphold this may lead the employer or management personnel to be liable to penal action or prosecution for abetment to causing hurt or injury while on duty.
Kritarth Team
21.2.19
Collect and collate the threats
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Employers in India are never in a helpless or hapless position unless by their own volition. The safety and personal security of all other employees and individuals should be of high priority and supreme importance. Failing to uphold this may lead the employer or management personnel to be liable to penal action or prosecution for abetment to causing hurt or injury while on duty.
Kritarth Team
21.2.19
Collect and collate the threats
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Colleagues,
The disciplinary proceedings are at the fag end where the Disciplinary Authority has to make a decision on the appropriate punishment if the charges are found proved. In my view, the charged officer should be prevented from interfering with the departmental work and threatening by assigning him work through suitable communication from higher authority, making him an 'Officer on Special Duty' (meaning to sit quietly and do nothing) until the final decision is reached. Alternatively, send him on forced leave if service rules permit until the decision is made.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The disciplinary proceedings are at the fag end where the Disciplinary Authority has to make a decision on the appropriate punishment if the charges are found proved. In my view, the charged officer should be prevented from interfering with the departmental work and threatening by assigning him work through suitable communication from higher authority, making him an 'Officer on Special Duty' (meaning to sit quietly and do nothing) until the final decision is reached. Alternatively, send him on forced leave if service rules permit until the decision is made.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
At present, the charged officer is interfering with the departmental work and is threatening everyone to involve him in all the works as the report of disciplinary authority is still pending.
Shone of insinuations, the above line conveys no facts or information. A senior officer cannot be rendered a persona non grata just because he is facing disciplinary proceedings. If you happen to be the Disciplinary Authority, you can expedite the proceedings. If you are not, your over-anxiety is disturbing.
From India, Kochi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Shone of insinuations, the above line conveys no facts or information. A senior officer cannot be rendered a persona non grata just because he is facing disciplinary proceedings. If you happen to be the Disciplinary Authority, you can expedite the proceedings. If you are not, your over-anxiety is disturbing.
From India, Kochi
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.