Criminal Trident Pack: IPC, CrPC and IEA by Sr. Adv. G.S Shukla and Adv. Raghav Arora
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

MANOJ KUMAR (T O)     05 October 2015

Removal from services by very junior disciplinary authority

Removal from services by officer appointed to perform the current duties who was very junior Disciplinary Authority and after delay of more than 4 months of Inquiry Report

Sir

I was removed from services the date history is as below:

  1. A charge sheet was issued on 31.01.2009.
  2. The IO/PO Appointed on 25.02.09.
  3. Inquiry proceeding was started on 30.03.2009 and declared Ex-part on 05.03.2010. (Total Period 1 Year).
  4. Undated Inquiry report was issued to Charge employee on 19.11.2010 by Disciplinary Auhority ie after 11 and Half Months.
  5. Director and Disciplinary Authority was transferred on 31.12.2010.
  6. Another officer was given temporary charge for a period of three months from 01.01.2011 or until a regular incumbent to the office is placed whichever is earlier.
  7. Another OM informing that Director-in-charge shall exercise all powers of Director as enumerated in bylaws wef 07.01.2011.
  8. The charged Employee was removed from services on 02.04.2011 by Director-in-charge ie after issue of Inquiry report ie after 4 and half months).
  9. The same officer was appointed as Director on 20.08.2011 i.e. after 4 and Half months from the date of removal of Services when he was Director-in-charge.

Note: In my case CVC and UPSC consultation was not necessary.

As per Government of India’s Decisions

A) DELAYS IN PASSING ORDERS BY THE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITIES – 

In the OM No. 39/43/70-Estt. (A) dated 08.01.1971, it has been envisaged that it should normally be possible for the disciplinary authority to take a final decision on the enquiry report within a period of three months.  In cases where it is felt that it is not possible to adhere to this time limit, a report may be submitted to the next higher authority indicating the additional period required and reasons for the same.  It should also be ensured that cases involving consultation with the CVC and UPSC are disposed of as quickly as possible.

2.         Though no specific time limit has been prescribed in the above OM in respect of cases where consultation with CVC and UPSC is required, it is imperative that the time limit of three months prescribed for other cases should be adhered to in such cases after receipt of the advice of the UPSC.

[Deptt. Of Personnel & Training OM No. 11012/21/98-Estt.(A) dated 11th November, 1998]

Observation:

Removal order was issued on 02.04.2011 after more than 4 months as Inquiry report was issued to Charge employee on 19.11.2010 by Disciplinary Auhority.

 

B) FINAL ORDERS TO BE PASSED BY THE ‘HIGHER DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY’ WHO INSTITUTED THE ENQUIRY:- 

When proceedings are instituted by a “higher disciplinary authority”, final orders should also be passed by such “higher disciplinary authority” and the case should not be remitted to a lower disciplinary authority, on the ground that on merits of the case it is sufficient to impose a minor penalty and such minor penalty could be imposed by a lower disciplinary authority.  In such cases the appeal against the punishment order of the “higher disciplinary authority” shall lie to the authority prescribed under the CCS (CCA) Rules, as the appellate authority in respect of such order. [MHA OM No. 6/26/60-Ests.(A) dated the 8th June, 1962].

Observation:

Final order was issued by Director-in-charge who was very junior to the Appointing Authority as well as Authority issued the charge sheet.

 

C) OFFICERS PERFORMING CURRENT DUTIES OF A POST CANNOT EXERCISE STATUTORY POWERS UNDER THE RULES:- 

An officer appointed to perform the current duties of an appointment can exercise administrative or financial power vested in the full-fledged incumbent of the post but he cannot exercise statutory powers, whether those powers are derived direct from an Act of Parliament (e.g. Income Tax Act) or Rules, Regulations and Bye-Laws made under various Articles of the Constitution (e.g., Fundamental Rules, Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, Civil Service Regulations, Delegation of Financial Powers Rules etc.)

[MHA OM No. 7/14/61-Ests. (A) dated 24th January, 1963].

Observation:

Director-in-charge was appointed to perform the current duties of an appointment can exercise Administrative or Financial power vested in the full fledged incumbent of the post but he cannot exercise statutory powers.

 

Review petition under section 29A is under consideration by President of the Council as above facts were come to my knowledge under Right to Information Act before two months.

 

Please advise whether my observations are correct and whats the Rule position. 

Thanks in advance



Learning

 7 Replies

Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Advocate)     08 October 2015

4 years. Any appeal filed within 45 days.

MANOJ KUMAR (T O)     08 October 2015

10. Appeal filled was rejected on 26.09.2011 by the Appellate Authority and allowed compensate pension, DR and Gratuity.

11. Arear Pension, DR and Gratuity paid during Nov 2013 and Mar 2014. Office transfer Pension to my Salary account on the last day of month.

12. Review petition under section 29 was rejected by the President and Minister on 10.02.2014.

Information under RTI Act received from CPIO in July 2015.

 

 

Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Advocate)     08 October 2015

how order under rule 29A and RTI are related.

MANOJ KUMAR (T O)     08 October 2015

Sudhir Sir

New facts received under RTI Act. Hence Appeal submitted under section 29A

  

Sudhir Kumar, Advocate (Advocate)     09 October 2015

Not clear. when review under rule 29A is rejected then in that case some order may have been issued and conveyed to you. In such case need of RTI is not understood.

MANOJ KUMAR (T O)     09 October 2015

Sudhir Sir

Please refer "Review petition under section 29A is under consideration by President of the Council as above facts were come to my knowledge under Right to Information Act before two months."

The revision petition under section 29 was rejected.

now review petion under section 29A is submitted on 10.08.2015 which is pending for consideration by President and Minister of teh Society.

If you dont mind please provide me your Mobile No, Email id so that i may directly contact you.

Thanks a lot.

 

 

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate)     11 October 2015

Yes the author can be in touch with Expert Mr. Sudhir Kumar on the subject issue in person over his phone or email id as Mr. Sudhir Kumar is well versed in the subject matter and can advise you properly. 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads



Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query