Central govt. employee problem- please help

Mere allegations are not enough, it should be proved in a Court of law and atleast he should be arrested and a charge sheet must be sent to employer.

Though it is not directly connected with employment, connected with moral turpitude and criminal offense.

It is left to member either to opt for VRS or continue to establish his innocence.  Till a charge sheet was received from employer, employee can remain in peace.

The category of issue is outside the purview of concerned organisation.However, the concerned department will come into picture only if the aggrieved party is also from the same organisation.

Repeated query

Discussion > Family Law > Maintenance > Father intimate affair

Any infraction for such violations ?

Term abuse has been assumed that the activity is within the organisation.If the said term relates to else where,a categoricial confirmation to the effect that the issue is outside the organisation has to be got to be serviced by the organisation,before resorting to the legal route.This is one of the requirement to be complied with by central government officials,whose service matters are governed by Central Administrative Tribunal.Hence a civl case can follow only subject to the said basic conditions...

Keeping with the general and good conduct of the employees rules, the organisation may issue a notice but since the offences relate to personal issues, especially happened outside the organisation, the department may not interfere in the personal affairs of the individual employees until and unless it is proved to be detrimental to the smooth functioning of the department.  

Above all, the employee in the organisation should have valuable contribution and should not be a target of superiors.  If there is an opportunity to torture him, superiors will never spare the opportunity.  At the end his sincerity and work for organisation and his relations with superior that ultimately counts.

A giovt servant is expected to maintain good moral conduct in private life as well and failure to do so is a professional misconduct.

The allegations are not sufficient for suspension.

Some advised that charges need to be proved before suspension.  I do not agree.

Such ethics are required from every citizen.  Though it is accepted that suspension is not a punishment, it is more than a death to sensitive citizen.  Only, if there is a doubt that he tampers the record and influences within organisation , suspension may be a reason.  But in case of any allegations, suspension may not be the right way, though nothing stops employer, and a good HRD can never resort to such ultimate step.  There may be several things involved in deciding good moral conduct and such law in private life and evidences.

It is true that in many organisations, where victimisation is prevailing even before issuing charges, suspension is effected, and as informed already it is not a good HR practice.

I also mainttain that arrest is not mandatory for one to be suspended from service.

In this case the allegations do not appear to be sufficient for suspension.

Government Servants Conduct Rules are such that even a law-abiding person cannot  live without breaching one or other of the Rules. The superior officers who are expected to enforce these rules are ignoramuses with no knowledge of law. They act as though they are law unto themselves. They will issue suspension orders or other orders without caring to look into the legal aspects of it. Once an illegal suspension order is issued what is the remedy available to the person concerned? He can appeal to the higher authorities in the heirarchy. But it is a big question mark whether he will  get relief. An alternative available to the Government servant is to go to court. A court can give immediate relief in the form of a stay order. But getting order from outside can stop his further advancement in the Government service.

Finally the Government Servant's Conduct Rules do not have the force of the law of the land. Once this was contested by Mr. Sudhir Kumar who claimed that the Constitution of India has provisions for promulgating Conduct Rules. But such provisions are temporary in nature like, say,  an ordinance. The article says that pending enactment of approriate legislation by the Parliament the competent authority can make rules. But has the Parliament enacted any law?  I would like to be enlightened. If any laws have been enacted, any amendment to such laws also will have to go again before the Parliament. Certain Acts of Parliament and State Legislatures require the making of corresponding Rules by the bereaucrats. But such Rules also have to be placed before the Parliament for passing. Any additions or amendments to the Rules have also to be passed by the legislature concerned. Are these things happening in the case of Government Servants' Conduct Rules. No Rules can precede  action by a court of law or be over-enthusiatic to do things even before the court does.  

Not only Government but even private organisations can take action if conflicts take place within the organisation. But such actions can be challenged before a court of law.

Suspension followed by Reinstatement or suspension followed by dismissal.The punishment has to be got modified by concerned judiciary and the directions therefrom has to be serviced to the Appointing Authority.for consideration.In practice the power of suspension and reinstatement can not be by a same person by post.

We have gone too far without proper response from the member's issue.

The remedy for all this must be fundamental awareness to the fact that  "prevention is always better then cure"

@ Dr Ramani

you said

"Finally the Government Servant's Conduct Rules do not have the force of the law of the land. Once this was contested by Mr. Sudhir Kumar who claimed that the Constitution of India has provisions for promulgating Conduct Rules. But such provisions are temporary in nature like, say,  an ordinance. "

Sorry, it is not me who claims that these rules are statutory, these are sttutory ane enforceble in court and will remain so even if I change my views.  Please read first line of the rules and also provision to Article 309 of the consitution.

Sorr these rules are not really temporary in nature like, say,  an ordinance   in fact these rules will prevail till replaced by legislation.  These rules are not at par with ordinance because ordinate has a life of 6  mopnths.  There is no provision for lapse of these rules.