• Disciplinary proceedings on false grounds

Charges: 
   1. No regular/monthly deduction from salary for festival advance.
   2. Applied for second festival advance without closing the first festival advance   account.
   3. Personal Overdraft account was overdrawn from time to time
   4. I instructed to open 2nd Overdraft account and transferred entire amount to my saving bank account
   5. Deduction of monthly installments of various loan was not made from my salary

My defense

  Defense for imputation No 1

1. Festival Advance granted to me: Terms and conditions followed up while applying for the Festival Advance (A/c No 33804394611).
2. Instead of regular deduction bullet payment of Rs 34550/-: This Account was not opened by me nor it was sanctioned or processed by me. Irresponsibility of the authority that sanctioned and processed the same is to be made accountable. Accounts were opened by other designated official at earlier branch Dhasa and I was not authorized for the functionality to make necessary deduction from salary through HRMS portal and loan documents for OD and festival advance were in the custody of appropriate authority at previous branch.
3. Absence of Checker and Maker Functionality at Modasar Branch: At Modasar branch we did not had checker and maker facility in HRMS which resulted in continuation of this irregularity/lapse which can be confirmed with staff loans of other employees at branch even for the officials who were posted earlier then me (details of the accounts attached). Further in this regard I made several attempts at HRMS for this checker maker functionality. Technical fault.
4. Association fee deduction: My own fee deduction regarding association membership was not being de-ducted for last one year for the same technical glitch of checker and maker functionality. Further loan doc-uments were missing so I was not having authority to make such changes given missing terms and condi-tions specific for the loan sanctioned to me.
5. Account liquidated on 23.03.2016: After leave of 3 months to take care of my wife and my own illness from 12.10.2016 to 15.01.2016, I made all attempts to rectify this irregularity and A/c was closed by previ-ous branch Darwha where this account was maintained even though they were not in the possession of the loan documents for the same. Even during this period no efforts were made at controllers end to pro-tect the bank interest by rectifying this irregularity.
6. However this is to be notified that no action or inquiry is pending against the Branch Manager Ms Monika Kashyap PF Id () who was posted at same branch before me having same nature of irregularity in festival advance (A/c No 34492687872). Her Festival Loan was disbursed on 13.12.2014; she made bullet payment of Rs 34,400 on 29.09.2015 instead of monthly deduction from salary. This again proves my innocence re-garding checker-maker facility in HRMS that was not functional in branch. Account statement is attached for your verification.

Defense for Imputation No 2
? If terms and conditions were met while applying for the previous festival Advances (A/c No33804394611) what caused that same were not followed at my end for Festival advance application for the account No. 35282629742. It is time lag and movement of documents explained above that explains the same. Delay in closure account at previous branch and no action at controllers end are the specific reasons. However first is to mention that even for my present festival advance regular monthly deduction were not made from HRMS functionality and same was started one month after joining the present branch. Regular efforts were made at RBO to get it done and it was made possible due to proper checker and maker facility at branch. Why such eagerness was shown this time and not at the time of previous festival advance? This again prove that due diligence was not followed up at AAO 4 and same article can be infringed upon the officer dealing in such with such type of matters.

Defense for Imputation No 2
? If terms and conditions were met while applying for the previous festival Advances (A/c No33804394611) what caused that same were not followed at my end for Festival advance application for the account No. 35282629742. It is time lag and movement of documents explained above that explains the same. Delay in closure account at previous branch and no action at controllers end are the specific reasons. However first is to mention that even for my present festival advance regular monthly deduction were not made from HRMS functionality and same was started one month after joining the present branch. Regular efforts were made at RBO to get it done and it was made possible due to proper checker and maker facility at branch. Why such eagerness was shown this time and not at the time of previous festival advance? This again prove that due diligence was not followed up at AAO 4 and same article can be infringed upon the officer dealing in such with such type of matters.

? This condition of closure of previous festival advance account was incorporated in this facility to avoid more than one advance at given point of time due to many festivals in India but it was certainly not incor-porated to deter employees from taking their necessary dues. Given this if account had been maintained at my branch it would have been closed definitely having closure amount of Rs 3448/- and monthly salary of Rs 49000/- at that time.
1. 2nd Festival loan of Rs 49000, A/c No 35282629742 was sanctioned in Aug 2015 at AAO 4 which was applied on 10.08.2015. Application date for new festival advance is 10.08.2015 which is almost 5 month late, after the credit in my previous Festival Loan A/c on 24.03.2015 however I made the neces-sary follow-up for missing documents at AAO4 during this period so that I can make request for A/c transfer at my previous branch or to close the same account. Given no whereabouts of the loan docu-ments I could not made both request. Even after sanction of new festival loan I made constant follow-up for the loan Documents of my previous Festival Loan at RBO for almost 2 months before opening the new account on 12.10.2015. Even this account was opened in hurry due to transfer and relieving on 12.10.2015. Closure outstanding of Rs 3448/- as mentioned in the letter in previous Festival Loan A/c is actually a closure amount and was pending due to missing documents at RBO 4.
2. Given end of the repayment period of previous festival advance, why no notice or remainder was sent for such a long period i.e. 7 months (5 before sanction+2 after sanction) either to me or the branch that was maintaining this account regarding closure of the account? This proves my innocence regard-ing non compliance of terms and condition and irregularity at the controller’s end. For almost a year and half from November 2014 to October 2015 loan documents remained untraced.

Defense for Imputation No 3

? Personal Overdraft account was overdrawn in the period mentioned in imputation due to non credit of the salary in OD account. Same explanation is there in my defense that Checker and Maker facility was not functional at Modasar branch. However if this has become the reason for initiating minor penalties against me please certify the no account of any staff under your control is having no such anomaly.

Defense for Imputation No 4
? Main cause of this irregularity of having two Over Draft Accounts and Outstanding more than entitlement on 12.10.2015 are missing documents at AAO 4, instructions from new BM and haphazard happening at branch on 12.10.2015 i.e. date on which new Branch manager took charge. However same irregularity was rectified within a reasonable time of 9 days given various obstructions at my end of having no access to CBS due to forced leave after transfer and pregnant wife at home to take care and relieving on 12.10.2015, the date on which all lapses occurred. Given 575 days irregularity of missing documents at the end of con-trollers this 9 days irregularity is negligible. If minor punishment can be initiated for this irregularity than punishment can be inferred for controllers also and should be initiated at the same time.
1. I was relieved on 12.10.2015 so how could I instruct the new Branch Manager, who has already taken charge of the branch, or any other staff without being instructed by new BM. So allegation regarding instruction to open any account is false. Further to strengthen my defense this is to be notified that OD against TDR, a/c No 35282087582, was sanctioned by new BM, on the very same day i.e. 12.10.2015, limit for the same account was approved by me in CBS as per instructions from new BM. I availed 1st OD limit of 146000 on 15.05.2014 given all terms and conditions were met. Defense for Imputation No 4
? Main cause of this irregularity of having two Over Draft Accounts and Outstanding more than entitlement on 12.10.2015 are missing documents at AAO 4, instructions from new BM and haphazard happening at branch on 12.10.2015 i.e. date on which new Branch manager took charge. However same irregularity was rectified within a reasonable time of 9 days given various obstructions at my end of having no access to CBS due to forced leave after transfer and pregnant wife at home to take care and relieving on 12.10.2015, the date on which all lapses occurred. Given 575 days irregularity of missing documents at the end of con-trollers this 9 days irregularity is negligible. If minor punishment can be initiated for this irregularity than punishment can be inferred for controllers also and should be initiated at the same time.
1. I was relieved on 12.10.2015 so how could I instruct the new Branch Manager, who has already taken charge of the branch, or any other staff without being instructed by new BM. So allegation regarding instruction to open any account is false. Further to strengthen my defense this is to be notified that OD against TDR, a/c No 35282087582, was sanctioned by new BM, on the very same day i.e. 12.10.2015, limit for the same account was approved by me in CBS as per instructions from new BM. I availed 1st OD limit of 146000 on 15.05.2014 given all terms and conditions were met.Defense for Imputation No 4
? Main cause of this irregularity of having two Over Draft Accounts and Outstanding more than entitlement on 12.10.2015 are missing documents at AAO 4, instructions from new BM and haphazard happening at branch on 12.10.2015 i.e. date on which new Branch manager took charge. However same irregularity was rectified within a reasonable time of 9 days given various obstructions at my end of having no access to CBS due to forced leave after transfer and pregnant wife at home to take care and relieving on 12.10.2015, the date on which all lapses occurred. Given 575 days irregularity of missing documents at the end of con-trollers this 9 days irregularity is negligible. If minor punishment can be initiated for this irregularity than punishment can be inferred for controllers also and should be initiated at the same time.
1. I was relieved on 12.10.2015 so how could I instruct the new Branch Manager, who has already taken charge of the branch, or any other staff without being instructed by new BM. So allegation regarding instruction to open any account is false. Further to strengthen my defense this is to be notified that OD against TDR, a/c No 35282087582, was sanctioned by new BM, on the very same day i.e. 12.10.2015, limit for the same account was approved by me in CBS as per instructions from new BM. I availed 1st OD limit of 146000 on 15.05.2014 given all terms and conditions were met.Defense for Imputation No 4
? Main cause of this irregularity of having two Over Draft Accounts and Outstanding more than entitlement on 12.10.2015 are missing documents at AAO 4, instructions from new BM and haphazard happening at branch on 12.10.2015 i.e. date on which new Branch manager took charge. However same irregularity was rectified within a reasonable time of 9 days given various obstructions at my end of having no access to CBS due to forced leave after transfer and pregnant wife at home to take care and relieving on 12.10.2015, the date on which all lapses occurred. Given 575 days irregularity of missing documents at the end of con-trollers this 9 days irregularity is negligible. If minor punishment can be initiated for this irregularity than punishment can be inferred for controllers also and should be initiated at the same time.
1. I was relieved on 12.10.2015 so how could I instruct the new Branch Manager, who has already taken charge of the branch, or any other staff without being instructed by new BM. So allegation regarding instruction to open any account is false. Further to strengthen my defense this is to be notified that OD against TDR, a/c No 35282087582, was sanctioned by new BM, on the very same day i.e. 12.10.2015, limit for the same account was approved by me in CBS as per instructions from new BM. I availed 1st OD limit of 146000 on 15.05.2014 given all terms and conditions were met. 2nd OD limit of Rs 294000/- was sanctioned at AAO 4 in August 2015.I waited for 2 months before being instructed by new BM to open a new account.
2. As new BM had already taken charge whatever I did was instructed by him only. However I ex-plained him the reasons for opening of 2nd OD account i.e. missing documents of the 1st OD account at AAO 4 and technical issue of A/c closure and limit enhancement at home branch only. Home branch that was maintaining the accounts was not in position to close the account without having possession of the documents and for the same reason it was not possible at Modasar branch to get it transfered. And I made all attempts to obtain documents of my all loan accounts sanctioned at previous branch just like the attempts are being made at RBO for me in telephonic conversation to join Dhasa branch however I could not get the chance for the written request due to hurried trans-fer and relieving as I was not aware of the intention at AAO 4. Given all these issues I was left with only option of opening of new OD account as limit cannot be increased in previous OD due same technical issue of home branch i.e. Darwha was maintaining those accounts.
3. I authorized debit vouchers under instructions of new BM. However I explained him the reasons for necessary instructions that were issued by him. However it was not that entire amount was debited in one go. Following is the narration of transactions took place in my accounts on 12.10.2015 which resulted in higher outstanding of Rs 442692/- than eligible entitlement of Rs 294000/-:
? My newly opened OD account was debited twice for Rs 100000 and Rs 194000 instead of one single debit of Rs 294000/- which shows intention was to transfer one transaction to previous OD and other to my SB account however this lapse was corrected on sudden re-minder on 21.10.2015. On close scrutiny of my SB account it can be easily noticed that there were 3 credit entries Rs 100000, Rs 49000 (festival advance) and Rs 194000 on 12.10.2015 and sum of first 2 successive credit amounts i.e. 149000 equals the debit amount in previ-ous OD account on that day which shows that intention was to credit previous OD account first. Further having amount in Saving Bank account enough, to close the OD account in this whole period from 12.10.2015 to 21.10.2015, should have resulted in closure or credit in my previous OD account instead of setting up of hold on 15.10.2015 given instructions for the same were given by new BM at branch on last day i.e. on 12.10.2015.
? Contradictory actions for same irregular account at different branches: It is to be mentioned that Rs 4000 were transferred to my previous OD account from my SB account no 31677014810 by Darwha branch for the irregularity (interest not served) in the account on 16.10.2015. However Modasar branch set up a hold of Rs 150000 on 14.10.2015 in my SB account given two OD accounts and greater outstanding than eligibility given enough balance in SB account on 14.10.2015 to close the previous OD account, transfer of Rs 149000/- could have rectified all the irregularities given awareness of the happening and instruction by the BM himself on last day at Modasar branch.
? However as soon as I got the information regarding this irregularity, I credited the outstanding/closure amount in my previous OD A/c the very same day i.e. on 21.10.2015, after taking account No of 1st OD A/c from my friend, through ATM and requested my previous branch to close it as soon as possible.

Defense for Imputation No 5
? Soon after opening of my loan accounts I had an accident while I was performing office duty at darwha Branch and I was on leave. Further when I was transferred to Ahmedabad circle I was continuously absent from 29.08.2014 to 30.09.2014 due to transfer issue at LHO which was represented by association and thereafter on deputation at different branches and offices from 01.10.2014 to 08.01.2015 in Ahmedabad. During this period even my salary was stopped and I was not aware of whereabouts of my HRMS also. Fur-ther when I got posting at Modasar branch there I find that there was not any Maker and Checker in HRMS portal. Even previous BM's monthly deduction were not made through HRMS. Account statement for the same is attached for your verification. This non availability of Maker and Checker functionality re-sulted in further continuation of this irregularity/lapse. However this is to noticed that I made several at-tempts at HRMS anf AAO 4 for this checker maker functionality which can be confirmed at Branch email Id and telephonic conversation.

Now Disciplinary authority has ordered penalty dated 13.10.2016 and imposed penalty of withholding one increment of pay for a period 1 year without cumulative effect.

Given lapses at their own end they are penalizing me. what course of action is advisable.
Asked 1 month ago in Labour from Ahmedabad, Gujarat
If you are aggrieved by order of disciplinary authority withholding one increment of salary file an appeal against said order before the appellate authority 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23367 Answers
1224 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1) you cannot ride 2 horses at the same time 

2) in your appeal you can give instance of other employee of same branch having same irregularities but no action was taken by the bank 

3) appeal would be against the order passed by disciplinary authority of the organisation 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23367 Answers
1224 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Now Disciplinary authority has ordered penalty dated 13.10.2016 and imposed penalty of withholding one increment of pay for a period 1 year without cumulative effect.
Given lapses at their own end they are penalizing me. what course of action is advisable.

If you are aggrieved over the decision of the disciplinary authority, you can prefer an appeal in the form of representation to the higher authority highlighting all those incidents that led to frame charges agaisnt you without proper or discreet inquiry and also without hearing your side or without considering the merits in this.

Even after not getting a proper response for this, you may plan to approach legal authorities with a petition seeking to redress your grievances.  
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14151 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Can I file suit in court of law simultaneously for this discriminatory order when other employee of the same branch having same irregularity in accounts?
Will it be against the institution or against the individual who initiated/ordered this inquiry?

It would be better that you concentrate on your grievances alone and not to point out the current practice of the management towards the practical functionality. 
If your colleague is enjoying the same facility without any hindrance, you may point it out in your representation without naming him and shall try to convince the authorities about the practical situation. 
There is no going against the institution or any individual, you are seeking your own rights however, you can restrict the same to your problem alone. 
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14151 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Labour Lawyers

Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12143 Answers
233 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1954 Answers
65 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Thresiamma G. Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1316 Answers
85 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Shashidhar S. Sastry
Advocate, Bangalore
1242 Answers
59 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
H. S. Thukral
Advocate, New Delhi
520 Answers
125 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
B.T. Ravi
Advocate, Bangalore
736 Answers
31 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Saptarshi Banerjee
Advocate, Kolkata
183 Answers
4 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Advocate Buvaneswari
Advocate, Chennai
24 Answers
12 Consultations
4.4 on 5.0
Rajinder Kumar
Advocate, New Delhi
68 Answers
4 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Rajni Sinha
Advocate, Mumbai
273 Answers
25 Consultations
4.8 on 5.0