In the result, the I'd is allowed in part. The dismissal order passed by the respondent on the date 24.04.2015 is set aside. The respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service. The petitioner is not entitled to back wages and all other attendant benefits on the principle of no work, no pay. The respondent is further directed to defer the annual increment for one year with cumulative effect.
Please help me, I cannot understand.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
2Please help me, I cannot understand.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In the result, the I'd is allowed in part. The dismissal order passed by the respondent on the date 24.04.2015 is set aside. The respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service. The petitioner is not entitled to back wages and all other attendant benefits on the principle of no work, no pay. The respondent is further directed to defer annual increment for one year with cumulative effect. Accordingly, the award was passed on 06.03.2023.
Please help me, I do not understand.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Please help me, I do not understand.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hi,
You challenged the termination order of your employer, and the competent authority passed a verdict partially in your favor. The verdict directed your employer to rehire you with the option of continuing your employment without any unpaid wages.
Thank you.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
You challenged the termination order of your employer, and the competent authority passed a verdict partially in your favor. The verdict directed your employer to rehire you with the option of continuing your employment without any unpaid wages.
Thank you.
From India, Madras
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user reply is partially correct. The petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service, but they are also entitled to back wages as per labor laws. There should be no deferral of the annual increment.
0
0
Dear Mr. Narasimhulu,
Based on the provided details, the understanding is as follows:
An employee has been terminated by the company, and subsequently, the terminated employee filed a petition challenging the dismissal order in court. The court has now issued an award, which includes the following:
1. The court has overturned or cancelled (set aside) the dismissal order issued by the management on April 24, 2015.
2. The management has been directed or ordered to reinstate the employee to their previous job or service.
3. The reinstatement should include continuity of service, meaning the employee's previous service period should be recognized without interruption.
4. The employee is not entitled to receive back wages or any other attendant benefits. This decision is based on the principle of "no work, no pay," as the employee did not work during the period of dismissal and is therefore not eligible for payment for that period.
5. The management has also been directed or ordered to defer the employee's annual increment (salary increase) for one year, and this deferral has a cumulative effect which means that the employee will lose one increment permanently and this loss will have a lasting impact on his overall salary progression. [My assumption: The Court, while agreeing to impose a punishment on an employee involved in misconduct, disagreed with the decision of dismissal, considering it as harsh and disproportionate to the misconduct. Consequently, the Court ordered a lesser punishment than the dismissal, which is the deferral of the increment with a cumulative effect]
6. As a result of the aforementioned directions or orders, an award was issued on March 6, 2023, likely concluding the legal proceedings.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
0
0
Based on the provided details, the understanding is as follows:
An employee has been terminated by the company, and subsequently, the terminated employee filed a petition challenging the dismissal order in court. The court has now issued an award, which includes the following:
1. The court has overturned or cancelled (set aside) the dismissal order issued by the management on April 24, 2015.
2. The management has been directed or ordered to reinstate the employee to their previous job or service.
3. The reinstatement should include continuity of service, meaning the employee's previous service period should be recognized without interruption.
4. The employee is not entitled to receive back wages or any other attendant benefits. This decision is based on the principle of "no work, no pay," as the employee did not work during the period of dismissal and is therefore not eligible for payment for that period.
5. The management has also been directed or ordered to defer the employee's annual increment (salary increase) for one year, and this deferral has a cumulative effect which means that the employee will lose one increment permanently and this loss will have a lasting impact on his overall salary progression. [My assumption: The Court, while agreeing to impose a punishment on an employee involved in misconduct, disagreed with the decision of dismissal, considering it as harsh and disproportionate to the misconduct. Consequently, the Court ordered a lesser punishment than the dismissal, which is the deferral of the increment with a cumulative effect]
6. As a result of the aforementioned directions or orders, an award was issued on March 6, 2023, likely concluding the legal proceedings.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user's reply is mostly correct in summarizing the situation regarding the employee's termination, court order, and subsequent directives. However, there is an incorrect assumption mentioned regarding the court's reasoning for the deferral of the annual increment. No details were provided in the original post to support this assumption.
0
0
SV Narasimhulu2,
In the result, the I'd is allowed in part. The dismissal order passed by the respondent dated 24.04.2015 is set aside. The respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service. The petitioner is not entitled to back wages and all other attendant benefits on the principle of no work, no pay. The respondent is further directed to defer annual increment for one year with cumulative effect. Accordingly, the award was passed on 06.03.2023.
My question is: are increments from 2015 to 2023 eligible or not because a one-year cumulative effect order was given? Please help me as I do not understand.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
In the result, the I'd is allowed in part. The dismissal order passed by the respondent dated 24.04.2015 is set aside. The respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service. The petitioner is not entitled to back wages and all other attendant benefits on the principle of no work, no pay. The respondent is further directed to defer annual increment for one year with cumulative effect. Accordingly, the award was passed on 06.03.2023.
My question is: are increments from 2015 to 2023 eligible or not because a one-year cumulative effect order was given? Please help me as I do not understand.
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Checked)-The respondent's decision to defer the annual increment for one year with cumulative effect means the increments from 2015 to 2023 are not eligible. Thank you for seeking clarification on this matter. (1 Acknowledge point)
0
0
To clarify your later query, you are not entitled to any increment from 2015 to 2023. The order states that you will have continuity of service but are not entitled to back wages and all other attendant benefits based on the principle of no work, no pay. There is a further direction to defer the annual increment for one year with a cumulative effect. Therefore, you will not earn any increment for a period of one year. This means that for one year of service after you last received an increment, you are not entitled to any increment. Essentially, you will not receive any increment for two continuous years. It is important to consider the period before termination in calculating the increment withheld period.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
0
0
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The user reply is incorrect. The petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service but not back wages. The direction to defer the annual increment for one year with cumulative effect does not mean withholding increment for two years. This interpretation is inaccurate.
0
0
Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
SCIENCE IF YOU UNDERSTAND.pdf
Green House Effect EASY TO UNDERSTAND.zip
CiteHR.AI
(Fact Check Failed/Partial)-The correct spelling is "I'd" not "I'd." Ensure consistency in grammar and punctuation for clarity.