Can suspension of nationalised bank employee be revoked while on bail
Rani
(Querist) 15 October 2014
This query is : Resolved
Dear Sir/Mam
There was a case in my family where the Daughter in Law died & her family filed a case under Sec 306,498(A).
The father in Law of the deceased is A Nationalized Bank Employee who is on Bail Now. Can he be re instated in Service after suspension revocation while on Bail?
Is there any Law regarding it.Does he require any letter from the polie station where the case was filed regarding his Reinstatement in Service & Suspension Revocation.
Urgent help required.
Vinesh K Chhaya
(Expert) 15 October 2014
Pls clear that the father suspended due to case u/s 306, 498(A) or other reason?
Anirudh
(Expert) 15 October 2014
It is for the bank authorities to consider. There is neither any prohibition/bar for revoking the suspension, or compulsion to revoke the suspension.
The police cannot give any certificate, letter, communication and such letter / communication from police will have no bearing or effect on the action/decision of the Bank Authorities.
Guest
(Expert) 15 October 2014
Dear Author, the concerned person is only an accused and out in bail.This is no way connected to his Service and he was not accused for any default in his service.The Nationalised Bank can not object his Rejoining of Service in any manner.Let him join the Duty and if at all any objection is raised contact the Unions in Bank and Consult a Local Good Advocate also.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 15 October 2014
Revocation of suspension after bail is discretionary relief wherein the court takes decision depending on merit of each case.
It is not the right of employee to get reinstated on getting bail.
Anyway do try for the same by writ application.
Anirudh
(Expert) 15 October 2014
Dear Rani,
I am happy that you posed the query after perfectly understanding that a suspended employee cannot rejoin duty of his own unless the suspension has been revoked. My reply to you is purely based on this understanding of the reality.
Please remember, the suspended person can always challenge the suspension through a Writ petition and obtain favourable order. That is another matter.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 15 October 2014
Bank can revoke the suspension if it is satisfied.
Guest
(Expert) 15 October 2014
Dear Author, The Reason for his suspension may be for his absence during his Arrest.The Nationalised Bank or Central Govt Institutions can not take any action for any offence which is not related to their service.In Railways you could find many Murder Accused in Service after coming out in Bail.Meet the Union Members if any problem.The concerned person is only an accused so far and Not Sentenced.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 15 October 2014
I trust it is a deemed suspension after the arrest by the police. In this case, after getting the bail, you can request the revocation of suspension. father in law has to write a letter to the appointing authority, to revoke his suspension.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 16 October 2014
I am constrained to partially disagree with Mr NJS Rajkumar.
(i) Custody beyond 48 hours (any offence) (justified or not) causes deemed suspension and the Bank wil and shall certainly have objection to the joining.
(ii) He can join the moment the suspension is revoked.
(iii) The Bank is empowered (not under compulsion) to revoke the suspension at time. May be same day of his release, without any NOC from police.
(iv) While working in Govt body, the allegation under 498a is not private offence. It is a professional misconduct also. Although rarely Govt organisaion resort to this but they have powers to issue chargesheet, conduct inquiry and dismiss the employee without waiting for the outcome of the court.
(v) suspension occurs only while the Govt servant is accused. If convicted then he is liable to be dismissed from service without chargehset and inquiry.
So the author should challange the suspension and hope to be reinstated.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 16 October 2014
Further, irrespective of the fact whether police has sent report to the deptt or not. He is under obligation ot himself report arrest and bail. Failure to do so attracts disciplinary action.
Rani
(Querist) 16 October 2014
Thank You for the Replies
@ Vinesh K Chaya Sir:- Yes the Suspension was due to 306 & 498A & no default or offence at workplace was involved.
@ Sudhir Kumar Sir:- The arrest & bail is already communicated by the concerned person to the Bank & Union as well.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 16 October 2014
"@ Sudhir Kumar Sir:- The arrest & bail is already communicated by the concerned person to the Bank & Union as well. "
I mean the communication should be by the employee in writing so that the is not guilty of hiding arrest and bail.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 16 October 2014
Please submit appeal to Appellate Authority (not appointing authority) against the suspension seeking reinstatement.
dr g balakrishnan
(Expert) 18 October 2014
Any arrest leads to suspension any where more so in a public service.
The man foisted (as you hold) necessarily report the matter to his employer and take suspension order that is one frees him from moral turpidity under service jurisprudence;
Once he informed his employer then till released by law court none can help him so he needs to get discharged of charges and released duly then his employer cannot deny him his job at all.
when so why short cuts please!
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 18 October 2014
I partially agree with Dr G Balakrishnan
Every suspension (including deemed suspension) is appealable. The accused is not expected to wait for acquittal for appealing against suspension. His right to such appeal starts from suspension.
The Bank has power to continue suspension till complete trial is over and also has power to revoke deemed suspension forthwith.
dr g balakrishnan
(Expert) 18 October 2014
Suspension is sought by the person as he is person arrested, so where is the need of appeal, till the court passes final orders. once orders court passed orders that order copy need be produced to the bank that would settle the issue sirs,
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 18 October 2014
Dr G Balakrishna is advised to read rule 10, rule 23 of CCS(CC&A) Rules
the same provisions in incorporated by banks in form of CDA Rules.
Further, suspension has not been sought by him. It is forced upon him and bank as he was in custody beyond 48 hours.
further if suspension is continued till acquittal the bank still has option to continue suspension and initiate departmental case if the acquittal is on technical grounds.
dr g balakrishnan
(Expert) 18 October 2014
sudhir, i know the rule u quoted.sir.
Once the incumbent informs bank of his arrest and seeks suspension and if accordingly suspended, then the bank domestic inquiry can start once he is out of the conviction, till then he cannot be treated as absent or absconding per se.
CCS rules never anticipated such kind of situation as this present one. is it not?
then that application of that rule is just infructuous sir.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 18 October 2014
No dear sir,
Reporting of arrest and suspension are two independent actions.
is not requested by the employee. There is no such provision. No employee has ever been seen giving an application that ".......in view of the above you are requested to kindly place me under suspension"
The deemed suspension is ordered as soon as deptt is informed of the detention beyond 48 hours. If employee doe snot report the police does report. There is nothing in rules that employee has to report arrest only then suspension will be ordered.
There is no case of he being treated as absent or absconding.
The employer in such case, if desirous of initiating disciplinary proceedings is not bound to wait of completion of disciplinary proceedings.
I cannot agree that :-
(i) the employee sought suspnesion.
(ii) he cannot appeal against suspension.
There are many CCS Rules [i.e. CCS(Leave)rules, CCS (TA)rules, CCS (TS)rules, CCS (Pension)rules, CCS (Revised Pay)rules, CCS (conduct)rules, CCS (MA)rules, and so on....] Here we are talking of CCS(CC&A) Rules.
I also cannot agree that CCS(CC&A) Rules did not visualise the situation. The rules do have a provision for the situation which re-occurs in each deptt/PSU frequently.
Rule 10 and 23 of CCS(CC&A) Rules and Gov instructions thereunder are relevant.
c.p.s. ramachary
(Expert) 21 October 2014
Arrest is a measure to ensure that, the accused does not remove the evidence or use influence for succeding in the case. If he is bank employee,the bank may suspend him since he is arrested and put in the jail. But arrest before prosecution is not conviction. Hence the bank is bound to revoke suspension, once the accused is granted bail.Bank has to follow the doctrine of restitution.
Guest
(Expert) 21 October 2014
Precisely and Well advised by Expert Shri.C.P.S.Ramachary
Rani
(Querist) 21 October 2014
Thanks a lot for your help
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 21 October 2014
broadly agreeing with Mr Ramachary I will deviate that the bank has a discretion to revoke suspension.
On the contrary bank as a discretion also to continue suspension and initiate disciplinary proceeding on the same allegations without waiting for outcome of the criminal case.
So the employee has to Appeal against suspension. If his appeal is not addressed properly or he does not get relief he can move to court.
Anirudh
(Expert) 21 October 2014
Dear Mr. Ramachary,
When you say, "Hence the bank is bound to revoke suspension, once the accused is granted bail", I am not sure what is the basis for such an assertion. Is there any legal basis for saying so - either Rules or judicial pronouncements?
Guest
(Expert) 21 October 2014
Dear Author,You are Welcome Please.
c.p.s. ramachary
(Expert) 21 October 2014
Dear Mr. Anirudh
Accused is different from convict. Acquittal or conviction will be the finality of the judicial enquiry. Hence placing the employee under suspension or continuing him under suspension in spite of getting bail would be nothing but harrasment and prejudicial. Every assertion need not have basis of citations/judicial pronouncements as it is matter of common sense which is not so common.(Law is nothing but codified common sense).
Judicial pronouncements do not lay law but interpret law.
Regards
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 21 October 2014
There is perhaps no need of citation at this stage in support of views of Mr Anirudh.
All that is needed is that the relevant CDA Rules of the Nationalise Bank are to be seen as to whether or not their provisions are identical to rule 10 & rule 19 of CCS(CC&A) Rules.
The author is not even disclosing the name of the bank so even if some expert has a copy of these rules cannot respond.
I absolutely agree that "accused is different from convict"
CONVICT
In Public sector Convicted is never suspended from service. He is not even required to be chargesheetd.
He is served with a SCN as to why penalty of dismissal be not imposed upon him and generally he receive this in Jail, submits reply with 10 days and penalty can be imposed after consideration of said reply.
Convict on conviction goes to jail and ceases to draw salary from deptt. There is absolutely no necessity or obligation to suspend him and favour him with half wages till above brief procedure is complete.
ACCUSED
It is only the accused for whom the provision of (i) suspension (ii) deemed suspension (iii) review of suspension (iv) revocation of suspension (v) regularization of suspension period; exists.
The accused can be of departmental case or criminal case.
It is also agreed that
"Acquittal or conviction will be the finality of the judicial enquiry"
True but such acquittal or conviction will be from the point of view of IPC. The legal procedure is laid down by Cr PC.
The departmental action is also a statutory procedure provided in the CDA Rules of the Bank. In this regard it is relevant that:-
(1) Dowry demand besides being a criminal case under IPC is also a professional misconduct under CCS (Conduct) Rules. These rules are generally copies by all PSUs in CDA rules. Disciplinary action can be initiated upon the employee in such cas without waiting for the outcome of the court.Since author is not even disclosing the name of the bank so even if some expert has a copy of these rules cannot respond.
(2) In case employee continues under suspension still the deptt is not bound to reinstate him on on acquittal if the acquittal is on technical or procedural grounds. The department can still continue him on suspension and initiate disciplinary proceedings.
FURTHER BANKOS BOUND TO REVIEW EVERY SUSPNESION WITHIN EVERY THREE MONTHS AND FAILURE TO DO SO WILL RENDER THE SUSPENSION INOPERATIVE.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 21 October 2014
IRRESPECTIVE OF ABOVE,
The employee once n suspension or deemed suspension gets a right to appeal against suspension or continued suspension and also to move to Court if necessary.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 21 October 2014
IRRESPECTIVE OF ABOVE,
The employee once on suspension or deemed suspension gets a right to appeal against suspension or continued suspension and also to move to Court if necessary.
Guest
(Expert) 22 October 2014
Ms. Rani,
case falls within the category of deemed suspension of the employee on his being kept in police/judicial custody for more than 48 hours. In that case the disciplinary authority is bound by rules not by discretion to keep the employee under suspension till at least the police investigation is completed and the case is filed for trial in the court.
So, if the police/IO's investigation in 306/498A case is already over and the case is under trial in the court of law, the employee can apply for reistatement. But, still the competent authority of the concerned will be bound to take official clearance from the investigating police authorities, say NOC.
So, it would be better for the employee to get certificate about the police investigation being over before applying or appealing for reinstatement. That may help the competent authority to get that confirmed without waste of any time in the process of completing the departmental formalities to reinstate the employee.
dr g balakrishnan
(Expert) 22 October 2014
Accused till convicted is considered innocent under Law of crimes.
Here the employee as a precautionary measure chose to inform bank that way he protected himself from moral turpidity; so he is still an employee under suspension getting 1/3 of his salary, if not he can claim.
Till the court either acquits he is accused and so innocent under law of crimes;
None knows what courts would decide in the matter; but he can move the court speedily decide the matter or release him on a condition he cannot go out of town and he cab still request the court as he is a wage earner his subsistance allowance not being to run his household, he may be permitted to work in bank and bank may be directed to accept his full time services but release him to appear in the court as and when he is summoned that court can pass such order Human rights convention as India is a signatory to UN Human Rights convention, as service is itself a property as pension is a propertu after L chandrakumar v UOI judgement by 5 member SC bench, that is under Art 141 all courts and states must follow so any Art 12 set up like a nationalized bank;
the court would certainly pass a favorable order in this case and bank can take him in service , if acquitted there would be a formal domestic inquiry which might pass an exoneration order by attaching court acquittal order. there is no need of any more opinions on this issue.
if inclined they are welcome! thanks
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 22 October 2014
I was expecting this sentence from Dr Balakrishana-
"Accused till convicted is considered innocent under Law of crimes."
Yes in criminal jurisprudence it happens.
But in service matters in Govt servant it is unfortunate that reserve happens. Accused till exonerated has to be treated as guilty and made to face all humiliation and disabilities.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 22 October 2014
I am also not able to agree that :-
"if acquitted there would be a formal domestic inquiry which might pass an exoneration order by attaching court acquittal order."
the standar of evidence required in criminal court is such that the allegation must be proved beyond doubt.
standard of proof in departmental inquiry is pre-ponderance of probably.
Both processes are governed by different statutory provisions.
So employer is not bound to copy the decision of criminal court in deciding disciplinary matters.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 22 October 2014
I do agree with following vies of Dr G Balakrishnan
"None knows what courts would decide in the matter; but he can move the court speedily decide the matter or release him on a condition he cannot go out of town and he cab still request the court as he is a wage earner his subsistance allowance not being to run his household, he may be permitted to work in bank and bank may be directed to accept his full time services but release him to appear in the court as and when he is summoned that court can pass such"
But considering the considered views of Mr PS Dhingra as stated above, there may perhaps be no need to go to court.
Guest
(Expert) 22 October 2014
Dear Dr. Balakrishnan,
With reference to your statement, "a precautionary measure chose to inform bank that way he protected himself from moral turpidity," it is pointed out that not as a precautionary meansure but as a matter of his duty as per the requirement of Employees Conduct Rules of his organisation, he was bound to inform the employer about his police/ judicial custody. Further, non-supply of the information by the employee is not considered as a case of moral turpitude, but his involment in the criminal/social evil. So, offence under sec. 306/498A that too if proved is taken as a case of moral turpitude, not otherwise.
Even if suspension order was made on his own information to the authorities that cannot make him free from moral turpitude for the purpose of his retention in service, if sentenced by the court of law for the crime. Only his acquittal can free him from the burden of moral turpitude.
Had he failed to inform or the police would have avoided to inform about his arrest, he could only be treated as having committed an indiscipline of being willfully absent from duty without permission of the competent authority as well for which the disciplinary authority could terminate his services after following the due process of disciplinary proceedings against the employee. On being informed by the police or some one else also, he could also be proceeded for hiding the fact of his arrest.
Guest
(Expert) 22 October 2014
Further to it, till the court acquits he is being treated only as accused and also innocent under law of crimes, that is why he is placed under deemed suspension being under clound, and not dismissed due to pendency of court's decision.
But, so far as deemed suspension in criminal cases is concerned, the employer has little discretion to use in order to avoid any disruption in the trial process adopted by the law enforcement authorities. So, revocation of his suspension is totally dependent on his acquittal in the case or at the most on NOC from the police authorities. If the offence is proved in the court case, the employee will have to face dismissal from service on account of moral turpitude that too even without holding of departmental inquiry by the authorities.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 19 October 2014
