1.In domestic enquiry against a workman the enquiry officer did not permit the workman to produce all his witnesses on the plea that evidence may be repetitive and may delay the enquiry. The workman was prepared to record evidence by bulk Affidavits, to save time. Does enquiry officer have the power to prune evidence?
2. The termination letter is signed by a person who is not Manager notified under Standing orders.Is termination valid?
Warm Regards.
From India, Pune
42. The termination letter is signed by a person who is not Manager notified under Standing orders.Is termination valid?
Warm Regards.
From India, Pune
Your queries are answered below:
1. If the Enquiry Officer has disallowed witnesses for the reason that it may delay the process of enquiry, it is improper, particularly since their depositions in chief are on record by way of affidavit, only the cross examination is left. But the EO has the power to disallow a witness where there is repetition and there is some evidence to indicate that a deliberate attempt is being created to delay the enquiry in this process. But then, he needs to pass a reasoned order. From the overall facts of the matter, can it be said that the EO is prejudiced against the employee and wants to hurry up the process and finish it somehow.
2. The termination order, is it signed by the appointing authority or anyone higher to it. In many organisations, the approval of the appropriate authority is taken on the file but is communicated by the disciplinary authority. In certain Standing Orders there is a provision that the termination of service can be done only with the approval of the specified authority mentioned there in, but in such cases the termination order can be passed and communicated by the disciplinary authority but is countersigned by such authority as is mentioned. This has to be examined.
From India, Mumbai
1. If the Enquiry Officer has disallowed witnesses for the reason that it may delay the process of enquiry, it is improper, particularly since their depositions in chief are on record by way of affidavit, only the cross examination is left. But the EO has the power to disallow a witness where there is repetition and there is some evidence to indicate that a deliberate attempt is being created to delay the enquiry in this process. But then, he needs to pass a reasoned order. From the overall facts of the matter, can it be said that the EO is prejudiced against the employee and wants to hurry up the process and finish it somehow.
2. The termination order, is it signed by the appointing authority or anyone higher to it. In many organisations, the approval of the appropriate authority is taken on the file but is communicated by the disciplinary authority. In certain Standing Orders there is a provision that the termination of service can be done only with the approval of the specified authority mentioned there in, but in such cases the termination order can be passed and communicated by the disciplinary authority but is countersigned by such authority as is mentioned. This has to be examined.
From India, Mumbai
Dear colleague,
Disallowing of the witness on the grounds of its causing delay in the enquiry may be regarded as premature and can be seen as denial of fair opportunity to the charesheeted employee if and when it gets challenged in the court later.
However, it is within the powers of the E.O. to allow or disallow any witness by passing speaking order.
Termination letter can be signed by the appointing authority or person delegated with the powers supported by due power of attorney.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR and Employee Relations Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Disallowing of the witness on the grounds of its causing delay in the enquiry may be regarded as premature and can be seen as denial of fair opportunity to the charesheeted employee if and when it gets challenged in the court later.
However, it is within the powers of the E.O. to allow or disallow any witness by passing speaking order.
Termination letter can be signed by the appointing authority or person delegated with the powers supported by due power of attorney.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR and Employee Relations Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Dear Mr Jagadish,
In most of cases, the management move with predetermined decision of " termination". To give an impression that the termination was fair and all procedures have been followed in the case. This is apparently viewed from you post.
1. The workman has to give a fair chance in domestic enquiry and allowed to submit all facts, figures and witness in his support to prove the allegations are false & fabricated. The decision of EO in pretext of repetitive is justified. But the decision can not be termed fair if did not allow the the workman to produce all his witnesses & evidences are not repetitive on ground of delay in the enquiry.
2. The one who got power to appoint is an authority to terminate, is a general terms and practice. In the instant case the termination is bad because the order signed by the person is not an authorized person as per the company Standing orders.
In my opinion the terminated workman should challenge his termination as the termination seems bad and not as per rules.
From India, Mumbai
In most of cases, the management move with predetermined decision of " termination". To give an impression that the termination was fair and all procedures have been followed in the case. This is apparently viewed from you post.
1. The workman has to give a fair chance in domestic enquiry and allowed to submit all facts, figures and witness in his support to prove the allegations are false & fabricated. The decision of EO in pretext of repetitive is justified. But the decision can not be termed fair if did not allow the the workman to produce all his witnesses & evidences are not repetitive on ground of delay in the enquiry.
2. The one who got power to appoint is an authority to terminate, is a general terms and practice. In the instant case the termination is bad because the order signed by the person is not an authorized person as per the company Standing orders.
In my opinion the terminated workman should challenge his termination as the termination seems bad and not as per rules.
From India, Mumbai
Dear Mr. Prabhat Ranjan,
In this case the workman had offered to file Affidavits of the concerned witnesses.
Therefore refusal on the ground of delay was false.In fact the enquiry officer was appointed to find workman guilty.
The matter is already decided against the workman by labour court and the revision would be filed.
Thanks and warm Regards.
From India, Pune
In this case the workman had offered to file Affidavits of the concerned witnesses.
Therefore refusal on the ground of delay was false.In fact the enquiry officer was appointed to find workman guilty.
The matter is already decided against the workman by labour court and the revision would be filed.
Thanks and warm Regards.
From India, Pune
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
Check LisCheck List ofr Disciplinary Proceedings Domestic Enquiry 11 Sep 09.doc
DOMESTIC ENQUIRY.ppt