31. How
the penalty of Recovery can be imposed if a GS is responsible for the Govt
loss?
·
The penalty of Recovery can be imposed
only when the GS is responsible for a particular act or acts of negligence or
breach of order that caused the loss.
· The lapses on the part of the GS must have a link with the loss sustained by the Department, say, for example, the lapses led to the commission of a fraud or misappropriation by another GS.
56. Charge of violation of Rule 3 (1) of the C.C.S. (Conduct) Rules, 1964, should not be vague
Rule
3 (1) of the C.C.S. (Conduct) Rules, 1964, is vague and of general nature. It
is obligatory on the disciplinary authority to specify and, if necessary,
define with precision and accuracy what constitutes a misconduct. Mere
violation of a general provision such as contained in Rule 3 (1) does not
constitute a misconduct and no penalty can be imposed for such violation. A
charge that rests on the general definition of failure to maintain absolute
integrity as a public servant may not be amenable to objective evaluation and
may, therefore, lead to arbitrary and unfair penalization of the public servant
concerned.
[A.L. Kalra v. Project & Equipment
Corporation of India Ltd., AIR 1984 S.C. 1361]
57. Act unbecoming of an employee
Click image to play video
One RMS official working at Delhi was issued notice under FR 56(j) and approached me for reply. The following is the draft I made in this case. This is just for the information of the blog readers.
Sub:
- Notice under Clause (J) (ii) of Rule 56
of FR – Case of ……………….
Ref: - Memo No. HRA/6/…../……./ dt. ……….
Apropos
reference, I am rather shocked to know that I have been subjected under 56 (J)
(ii) of F.R & Rule 48 of CCS (pension) Rules, 1972 arbitrarily and without
any proper justification.
I am
submitting the following for your kind consideration with the prayer to
withdraw the decision and allow me to complete my full service.
At the outset,
I wish to submit that there is no adverse complaint against me about my
performance and I have not been proceeded with any charges. I am discharging my
duties to the entire satisfaction of my supervisors and my integrity has never
been doubted under any circumstances in the past.
In accordance with the Government of India instructions, the application of FR 56 (J) (ii) shall be made only on the following grounds: -
Com R.Maharajan who is working as OA, Divisional office, Tirunelveli division and one of the young teammates of the Tamilnadu Circle drafting group had regularly posted in the WhatsApp group with the caption “Have a look Comrade” about one rule for a day both in English & Tamil. He will soon become an officer as per my observation and with his consent what he posted in the WhatsApp group I am reposting on this website to enrich the blog viewers' ruling knowledge. Hope you will enjoy it. It will take one minute daily and one rule for one day. It will be posted daily at 8 AM and the first post will be on 17.10.2024. After viewing it, if you want to wish him luck, please send a message to his number 8610982321.
31. How is the word ‘hubris' pronounced?
The ‘hu' sounds like the ‘hu' in ‘huge', ‘human', and ‘humour, and the ‘i' that follows is like the ‘i' in ‘hit', ‘pit' and ‘bit'. The word is pronounced ‘HYUU-bris' with the stress on the first syllable. It comes from the Greek ‘hybris' meaning ‘outrage, insolence'. Nowadays, the word is mostly used in formal contexts to mean ‘arrogance or pride'; it is always used to show disapproval. In Greek literature and mythology, very often it was hubris, the excessive pride or arrogance that ultimately led to a character's downfall.
· If individual has not received a reply within one month he can ask for an interview with the next higher authority
· Such officer should immediately take action without delay.
51. Participation of demonstration does not mean participation of strike
Where
a Government servant participates in various demonstrations organized in
support of strike, which was declared illegal, it does not mean that he
participated in the strike.
[O.K.
Ghosh v. E. X. Joseph, AIR 1963 SC 812.]
52. Wearing black-badges would not prevent transaction
