Can Deferred Punishment Lead to Immediate Dismissal for Future Misconduct?

Punishment Deferment and Future Misconduct

I have a doubt regarding punishment deferment. In the case of serious misconduct by an employee, a charge sheet is issued, an inquiry is conducted, and if the misconduct is proven during the inquiry, the punishment is dismissal from service.

In a scenario where the management decides to give the employee a second chance by deferring the punishment, if the employee commits similar misconduct in the future, can we proceed with dismissal based on the findings of the previous inquiry without conducting a fresh inquiry since the earlier punishment was deferred?

Kindly clarify my doubt.

Regards,
GIRI

Understanding the Industrial Disputes Act

The Industrial Disputes Act is essentially based on the concept that workmen are on the disadvantaged side, while management represents the stronger and wealthier side, utilizing maximum resources. To protect management and company interests, it is crucial to strengthen your documentation. All interactions with workmen should be documented in writing.

Steps to Handle Misconduct

If you are considering giving another chance to a workman, ensure to obtain a written statement from them confirming that they will not engage in such misconduct in the future. In the event of a repeat offense, management reserves the right to take necessary actions, including termination.

However, there remains uncertainty regarding whether the workman will commit the same misconduct again, leading to potential involvement with the Labor Office or Labor Court. In such a scenario, it is essential to adhere to all legal procedures, including domestic inquiries, to substantiate the misconduct.

Regards,
Manish Bali
Head - IR/HR

Thank you very much for your reply. I understand that if we intend to take action against a worker who has repeated the same misconduct in the future, we must follow all the necessary procedures. We can utilize the previous inquiry proceedings to support our further investigation. Am I correct?

Regards,
Giri

Upon the company's discretionary power, it retains a proven employee for one misconduct event. Therefore, the employee cannot be dismissed based on previous allegations and without conducting a fresh inquiry into the recent misconduct.

Though the earlier misconduct was proved and the termination awarded was not executed, and the employee was taken back on compassionate grounds, you will not be justified in awarding a termination for the same misconduct. You need to go through the process of a domestic enquiry once again to prove the guilt. The only strong point you will have in the event you conclude that he needs to be terminated in the second enquiry is that you have given him an opportunity to mend himself on a previous occasion and that he has not reformed himself. Hence, do not go by the past enquiry and take a decision to initiate a fresh enquiry, prove the guilt, and then act.

Regards

I agree with Kannan. You cannot simply terminate a delinquent employee for subsequent misconduct of the same nature for which he was proceeded against formally but let off leniently on humanitarian grounds. Every misconduct is distinctly co-terminous with the final disciplinary action taken against it. So when repeated, you have to start afresh against it—of course, taking the earlier one into account for reaching a befitting decision.

Disciplinary Proceedings and Penalty Imposition

Once the Disciplinary Authority initiates disciplinary proceedings and an inquiry in which the employee is found guilty, the Disciplinary Authority needs to bring the proceedings to a close and a logical conclusion by awarding an appropriate penalty or even by condoning the conduct with a warning not to repeat such behavior in the future. The DA enjoys discretionary power to do so but cannot allow the disciplinary proceedings to hang as a Sword of Damocles over the employee's head as a deterrent against the repetition of such conduct in the future by deferring the decision to impose a penalty and then passing the penalty of dismissal for committing misconduct again. This practice is violative of the principles of natural justice as the findings of the inquiry in respect of one misconduct cannot be used to award punishment for another misconduct.

Moreover, it may also amount to procedural impropriety as the service rules or standing orders direct the DA to award a penalty, enumerated in the rules, to the delinquent employee upon being found guilty in the inquiry but do not provide for deferring the penalty as a deterrent measure. The DA must initiate fresh disciplinary action if the employee commits misconduct again and can refer to the past record while imposing a penalty concerning such misconduct.

Regards,
B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advisor