sir, i have been working in APTransco. i was suspended pending departmental enquiry in misappropriation of funds in 1994 and a parallel criminal case was also registered. Enquiry officer was appointed and he has not come to a conclusion against me and asked to await till the outcome of criminal case. Then the department ordered a denova enquiry, and i challenged the same and it was quashed by the High Court. The department again appointed another enquiry officer to continue the first enquiry and the enquiry officer gave a report in 2007 saying that the charge is not proved. Then the department again asked the same enquiry officer to examine two departmental officers as witnesses and continue the enquiry.

The enquiry officer examinend the witnesses suggested by the department and gave a report in 2009 concluding the charge against me is not proved. But the department gave a show cause notice differing with the enquiry reports of 2007 and 2009 and treating the prosecution written arguments as the cause to differing the enquiry reports. In the end of 2009 i was convicted in the criminal case, a have challenged the conviction immediately and it was suspended by the sessions court immediately. But department dismissed me in January,2010. In 2016 the sessions court allowed my appeal and acquitted me honourably.

I filed a case in the high court for reinstatement and it was allowed in 2019. i was reinstated as per the High court order treating the dismissal period also as suspension but again issued the showcause notice saying the same that differing with enquiry reports and showing the cause as written arguments filed by the prosecuter in lower court. i have given reply and was not satisfied by the department and ordered punishment of "withholding of 2 increments with cumulative effect". There is no mention about the treatment of suspension period of 25 years and pay fixation and promotions.


It appears, there is a series of errors were committed in your case. First of all, there was no need to defer the first enquiry till the conclusion of the criminal trial. Secondly, when the dismissal was based on the conviction in the criminal court and as the sessions court honourably acquitted you, the whole dismissal action also becomes non-est in the eyes of law. However, to issue a show cause notice based on the arguments adduced in the criminal court is patently illegal and improper. The prosecution arguments are based on evidence adduced in the criminal trial and it cannot be relied in the departmental enquiry as they are not part of its record. So the punishment order is defective and is opposed to the principles of natural justice.
Now as regards punishment imposed on you, in the Conduct Rules of many government organisations it is provided that where there is a punishment imposed, the period of suspension is not treated as on duty and the employee is not entitled to anything more than the subsistence allowance already paid. So naturally there is no question of any promotion or leave entitlement for this period. However, there is a strong case for revision of Subsistence Allowance as per pay revision as the original pay scale no longer exists after the pay revision. This can be analysed further only if the Rules are seen. In case you are interested, more details can be forwarded and the issue could be analysed more in depth.

From India, Mumbai

If you are knowledgeable about any fact, resource or experience related to this topic - please add your views using the reply box below. For articles and copyrighted material please only cite the original source link. Each contribution will make this page a resource useful for everyone.

Please Login To Add Reply

About Us Advertise Contact Us
Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2021 CiteHR.Comô

All Material Copyright And Trademarks Posted Held By Respective Owners.
Panel Selection For Threads Are Automated - Members Notified Via CiteMailer Server