Sir,
I humbly request your Advice in the below mentioned case.
Some Background
2 Best Friends( Laxmi and Jyoti) Joined Delhi Womens Polytechinc (under DTTE) in the year 1979
After a few years the 2 friends were appointed adhoc to the Post of Lecturers (in the abscence of any Rules).
They went about with their duties happily and diligently (They were the Best of friends)
until one day It came to Light that the HOD was about to Retire and a vacancy had arisen.
They 2 were the natural successors.
All hell turned loose and these 2 became sworn enemies fighting for the HOD post.
Laxmi claimed the post contending that She had seniority by 3 months.
Jyoti claimed the post an grounds of her higher education.
Finally Jyoti got the post after pulling strings with the higher Authorities. It is claimed by Laxmi that She had links with the Director (Department of training and Technical Education, DTTE) which were Morally depraved.
Laxmi, Seeing the opportunity slip, took a wrong Step and Submitted a Fake MA Degree, which was entered in her service book.
Jyoti raised Objection and again after using her connections got the DTTE to start a Dept. Enquiry. Following which an FIR was Lodged.
It has to be noted here that the Whole Dept.(including the Principal and HOD) was behind Laxmi for the promotion, owing to the fact that She was a better worker/teacher.
The matter ended up in Court of City Magistrate Delhi (Special Cell)
in the meanwhile Laxmi retired with superannuation and got Provisional Pension but no Gratuity.
After 20 years in Court, the Judge let her go with a Penalty of Rs. 10000 and a Bond
If you could Advice on
Since the Proceedings have concluded,
1. Should Laxmi approach the Dept. to release the Gratuity?
2. is this gross misconduct or serious crime?
Also, please note that there have been no Pecuniary Losses
She is afraid that the Dept. may deny her the same or even worse, withhold or reduce Her Pension
Most Humbly,
Thanking you
I humbly request your Advice in the below mentioned case.
Some Background
2 Best Friends( Laxmi and Jyoti) Joined Delhi Womens Polytechinc (under DTTE) in the year 1979
After a few years the 2 friends were appointed adhoc to the Post of Lecturers (in the abscence of any Rules).
They went about with their duties happily and diligently (They were the Best of friends)
until one day It came to Light that the HOD was about to Retire and a vacancy had arisen.
They 2 were the natural successors.
All hell turned loose and these 2 became sworn enemies fighting for the HOD post.
Laxmi claimed the post contending that She had seniority by 3 months.
Jyoti claimed the post an grounds of her higher education.
Finally Jyoti got the post after pulling strings with the higher Authorities. It is claimed by Laxmi that She had links with the Director (Department of training and Technical Education, DTTE) which were Morally depraved.
Laxmi, Seeing the opportunity slip, took a wrong Step and Submitted a Fake MA Degree, which was entered in her service book.
Jyoti raised Objection and again after using her connections got the DTTE to start a Dept. Enquiry. Following which an FIR was Lodged.
It has to be noted here that the Whole Dept.(including the Principal and HOD) was behind Laxmi for the promotion, owing to the fact that She was a better worker/teacher.
The matter ended up in Court of City Magistrate Delhi (Special Cell)
in the meanwhile Laxmi retired with superannuation and got Provisional Pension but no Gratuity.
After 20 years in Court, the Judge let her go with a Penalty of Rs. 10000 and a Bond
If you could Advice on
Since the Proceedings have concluded,
1. Should Laxmi approach the Dept. to release the Gratuity?
2. is this gross misconduct or serious crime?
Also, please note that there have been no Pecuniary Losses
She is afraid that the Dept. may deny her the same or even worse, withhold or reduce Her Pension
Most Humbly,
Thanking you
Dear Ripa,
It is discernible from the available inputs some of which seems to be admitted facts giving rise to the cause of action, being a lecturer in the State-run Delhi Women's Polytechnic, the individual was a Government servant governed by the Government Servants Conduct Rules and the Civil Services ( Classification, Control and Appeal ) Rules. Against the misconduct of submission of a fake educational qualification certificate serious charges might have been framed against her apart from lodging a simultaneous criminal complaint with the Police which might have been ended in conviction with fine after a trial by the City Magistrate. In view of the pendency of the criminal case as well as the departmental disciplinary proceedings, she would not have been permitted to retire on attaining the age of superannuation in the mean time and would have been placed under suspension and paid provisional pension equal to subsistence allowance.
In view of the conviction with fine to the tune of Rs.10000/- by the Criminal Court, now the Department may dismiss her services and as such she would not be eligible to get terminal benefits like gratuity and pension.
From India, Salem
5967It is discernible from the available inputs some of which seems to be admitted facts giving rise to the cause of action, being a lecturer in the State-run Delhi Women's Polytechnic, the individual was a Government servant governed by the Government Servants Conduct Rules and the Civil Services ( Classification, Control and Appeal ) Rules. Against the misconduct of submission of a fake educational qualification certificate serious charges might have been framed against her apart from lodging a simultaneous criminal complaint with the Police which might have been ended in conviction with fine after a trial by the City Magistrate. In view of the pendency of the criminal case as well as the departmental disciplinary proceedings, she would not have been permitted to retire on attaining the age of superannuation in the mean time and would have been placed under suspension and paid provisional pension equal to subsistence allowance.
In view of the conviction with fine to the tune of Rs.10000/- by the Criminal Court, now the Department may dismiss her services and as such she would not be eligible to get terminal benefits like gratuity and pension.
From India, Salem
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.
SC - Gratuity can be denied only on termination for mortal turpitude 6.12.2016.pdf
Gratuity Form I.doc