Cite.Co is a repository of information and resources created by industry seniors and experts sharing their real world insights. Join Network
1. Sir, Sh. Dinesh Divekar ji, in my opinion, has rightly opined that in the situation as mentioned by the initiator of this thread, Domestic Enquiry should have been conducted. Before going for Domestic Enquiry, a preliminary enquiry should have been conducted by the organisation as a fact finding process. Domestic Enquiries without a fact finding Preliminary Enquiry are meaningless since the management will not be having any proof to substantiate the charges levelled against the employee.
2. Secondly, regarding recoveries from the full and final settlement or deductions from wages of the employee, the question will also arise, in my opinion, whether the management has complied with the provisions of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 so far as the same relate to deductions.

From India, Noida
The first part I agree.
The second part does not hold true most probably because the VP would have a salary of more than 18,000 per month. Therefore the provisions of payment of wages act will not apply

From India, Mumbai
I still do not understand this problem with the harassing emails. If a person is writing to you again and again all you need to do is to go to your email settings and set up a rule to automatically tracks the mails, or to block it directly at server level.
Just because someone sends you a male does not mean that you need to read it. Automatically the harassment no longer is the problem
Let him go to the police. It is highly unlikely that the police will bother with what is in fracture of personal dispute. However you should keep a folder ready with the complete details of your internal investigation done by an independent person, preferably your auditor and give it to the police if they do come up to your office

From India, Mumbai
All I can see is that the whole issue is going in rounds & rounds......with the same issues being raised & discussed by the members with no clarity from the initiator-end.
In fact, I found some contradictory statements by see my earlier posting. Ganeshpawar says the VP refuses to agree that the Bills attached with the travel statement [proven to be fake] are NOT his. Then what's the VP claiming about in the first place & what's Ganeshpawar loosing his sleep for?

From India, Hyderabad

This discussion thread is closed. If you want to continue this discussion or have a follow up question, please post it on the network.
Add the url of this thread if you want to cite this discussion.

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2020 Cite.Co™