Queries may please be replied.....
J SRINIVASAN
(Querist) 03 December 2012
This query is : Resolved
Dear Sir
Kindly find attached my case history file.
MY CASE HISTORY :
I was working as Manager Finance in NTPC Simhadri-Vishakhapatnam.
Earlier from 18.12.1986 to 24th April 2011 I was working in NTPC VSTPS, Madhya Pradesh
On 28th April 2011 , I have joined in Vishakhapatnam office as manager finance
On 22nd June 2011, I was taken to Delhi Head office by my HOD by saying that there is a capitalisation meeting to be held at delhi.
On reaching delhi head office, I was shown some wrong payments / financial irregularities by the corporate ERP team which has took place during the year 2008 to 2011 at VSTPS Madhya Pradesh., i.e., during that period I was working in Madhyapradesh Project. The management wants explanation for that . Originally I was brought to delhi for some capitalization meeting and no such meeting occurred at delhi.
Later, I was told to write down the irregularities appearing on the system in a paper, by saying that these irregularities happened during my tenure at Madhya Pradesh project. The management told me that we will be discussing this matter with Director finance, NTPC who was on tour to Mumbai and likely to return on Saturday i.e., 25th june.
On 25th June 2011, the management told me that it is better to visit VSTPS, Madhya Pradesh project so that the irregularities can be finalized , and then we can meet Director finance. I have also agreed to that.
On 25th night, we have reached Madhyapradesh Unit by flight, then the management has simply served me SUSPENSION LETTER. The officials have never talked or discussed or questioned anything. The suspension letter is simply typed as “ Kept under suspension pending enquiry on report of financial irregularities “. It is not mentioning , what type of irregularities reported and during which period and also the SUSPENSION LETTER is not as per the proforma mentioned in NTPC CDA/Disciplinary Rules.
Immediately after issing the suspension letter, the town inspector appeared at that place, and the management handed over me to the police.
Police produced me before magistrate, Waidhan district- Singrauli and issued warrant to send me to Pachor Jail.
No body has questioned me anything including police. I was totally stunned. My bail application was initially rejected by the lower court , on the reason , that charge sheet not produced by police and also due to the objection imposed by NTPC.
I have moved my bail application with Jabalpur High Court. There also , NTPC oppsed my application and my bail got refused on 18.12.2011 even after 3 months and the chargesheet received. Again a revision was filed by my lawyer and it was withdrawn by him . Again 3rd application was filed by my lawer and I have changed my Lawyer since, the one who has not been appointed , seems to be not responding to my family’s request. After changing the Lawyer at Jabalpur and the hearing , I finally got BAIL on 12.10.2012. In total I WAS IN JAIL NEARLY 16 MONTHS.
After coming out on bail, I have sent a letter to Director HR, NTPC-Delhi , by explaining the facts and questioned my suspension , which is not done as per NTPC norms,CDA/Disiciplinary rules and request them for re-instating me to work . Also I have sent my bail out order copy for release of my subsistence allowance from 01.05.2011 to till date .
The letters were duly sent through Registered Post and Acknowledgement also received . In the meanwhile, I have received a letter from GM Finance NTPC-Delhi, stating that , he is appointed by NTPC as enquiry officer and the letter says that I have to appear before them for departmental enquiry .
MY QUERIES ARE :
1. Can my suspension done by NTPC in cunning way is challengeable before court of Law?
2. Can I approach Court for release of subsistence allowance from 01.05.2011 ?
3. Can I approach Court for STAY - to the improper departmental enquiry ?
4. If it cannot be stayed, then Can I accompany a lawyer for departmental enquiry. ?
5. Since, the trial has started, Can I stop the departmental enquiry , since, displaying my evidences to the department may prejudice to the court case?
THE STATUS OF THE CASE AT COURT :
The case has been committed and charges are framed under IPC 409,420,464,468,471.
The trial has also started on 16.11.2012 and nobody appeared.
The next trial is to take place on 22nd January 2013. I HAVE COLLECTED MY EVIDENCES TO SOME EXTENT FROM NTPC THROUGH PETITION IN TRIAL COURT U/S. 91 OF IPC.
ANY DETAILS ABOUT THE CASE MAY PLEASE BE EMAILED TO ME .
Please suggest me good replies, since my mental agony is increasing day by day . any further details if u need , please mail to my email id .
Srinivasan J
ajay sethi
(Expert) 03 December 2012
1)The law on the circumstances in which a Departmental Inquiry can be stayed when criminal proceedings are underway, and the law on the impact of the decision in the criminal proceedings on the DepartmentalInquiry can be found in the detailed yet perspicuous judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Capt. M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. and Anr., 1999 (2) SLR 338,
2)as soon as criminal proceedings commence, the delinquent employee facing a domestic/departmental inquiry invariably prays that the Inquiry should be stayed till the final decision in the criminal case. This prayer is granted on the touchstone of the principle laid down in Anthony's case (supra) primarily to ensure that the defense of the accused in the criminal trial may not be jeopardised because of its early or prior disclosure. If the substance of the two proceedings does not overlap, it would not be proper to stay the domestic inquiry, since it is also in the interest of justice that both proceedings come to their earliest end
3)the rule making authority bestows the discretion upon the Disciplinary authority, either to allow the delinquent to engage a lawyer, or to decline. There is however, no blanket rule or a precedent to the effect that a delinquent should be allowed the services of lawyers in every departmental inquiry.
if the charge or an allegation being faced by the delinquent is very serious, or where the documentary evidence is voluminous requiring expert skill to examine and to cross examine the witnesses, or where there may appear substantial issues relating to proper interpretations, or where the inquiry officer and or the presenting officer are legally trained to conduct such quasi-judicial inquiries and developed an art of examining and cross examining the delinquents, the judiciary would normally allow the delinquent, a representation by a lawyer in such categories of cases
when the delinquent is to suffer serious civil or pecuniary consequences, such request would be reasonable and must be entertained
ajay sethi
(Expert) 03 December 2012
The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has said suspended government employees cannot be deprived of their rights to receive "subsistence allowance" during the suspension period.
The tribunal, allowing the plea of a suspended chief statistical adviser of the Income Tax department said, "Even though the applicant (Tushar Ranjan Mohanty) has not sought this relief, this aspect needs to be looked into, if it is correct, because subsistence allowance cannot be denied."
The panel, headed by member Meera Chhibber, found merit in Mohanty's appeal, which seeks revocation of his suspension.
Mohanty, a resident of Delhi, approached the tribunal after being suspended on March 2008, alleging that he has neither been informed about the reason for his suspension nor subsistence allowance has been paid to him.
Taking note of the charge sheet filed against Mohanty, the panel said, "It is clear that he was suspended as disciplinary proceedings were contemplated against him.
"Disciplinary proceedings have already been initiated. Moreover, Mohanty has himself produced the order where it is clearly stated that the applicant was placed under suspension for alleged misconduct."
Mohanty was charged with insubordination, exceeding his authority, misuse of public funds, unfaithfulness and untrustworthiness.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 03 December 2012
I do agree with the opinion of Ajay Sethi.
J SRINIVASAN
(Querist) 03 December 2012
thanks ajay sir, in my case nearly 30 beneficieries were wrongly paid and the management claims that since my employee id is appearing in SAP, I have only did that like that. but no beneficiery is appearing as witness in my chargesheet, even police has not arrested any of the beneficieries, nor taken any statement from them , my fir is simply like a question answer pattern, what ever the management told the same has been copied in the fir and witness GAWAH. even out of the total amounts charged, only a part of that amount documentary evidence that too the output(bank payment voucher) is given to the court. thanks for your help. first i will insist for my subsistence allowance from 01.05.2011 before attending the preliminary enquiry and put a request for accompaning a lawyer for attending the enquiry.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 03 December 2012
repeated query refer to http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/Case-and-Departmental-Enquiry-356331.asp#.ULzNemfPz_0
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 25 September 2013
You have been query in multiple threads almost repeating the same thing.
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/Queries-may-please-be-replied--356346.asp#.UkMMQH_Qzmk
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/juristiction-clarification-357856.asp#.UkMMPH_Qzmk
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/Service-Law-rules-425156.asp
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/suspension-letter-appended-conditions-387071.asp#.UkMMM3_Qzmk
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/Challenging-the-Charge-Sheet--358001.asp#.UkMMOX_Qzmk
You are spreading facts in all these multiple threads and you are only the looser despite the fact that you are in the tightest corner. You are confusing the experts.
