1000 TIT BITS ON DISCIPLINE -121
471. Consideration of promotion during the currency of punishment
A public servant does not become disentitled to his promotion during the currency of this penalty. His case for promotion has to be considered in normal course and, if selected, the promotion can be given effect to from the due date though the recovery from his pay shall continue in the new post [DP&AR O.M. No. 22011/2/78-Estt.(A), dated 16-2-1979).
472. Reduction to lower stage of pay, as a minor penalty
Reduction to lower stage of pay, as a minor penalty was introduced in CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, vide. DOP&TO.M. No. 11012/4/86-Estt. (A), dated 13.7.1990. It was further modified vide. DOP&T Notification No. 11012/5/2003-Estt.(A), dated 23.8.2004. In its present form it reads as :
“Reduction to lower stage in the time scale of pay by one stage for a period not exceeding three years, without cumulative effect and not adversely affecting his pension.”
The Government of India have clarified that since this minor penalty has specifically been carved out of clause (v) of Rule 11 specifically, it does not constitute a major penalty under that clause. To make it clear, clause (v) of Rule 11 has been amended [DOP&T O.M. No. 11012/4/86-Estt. (A), dated 28-5-1992).
473. No power to withhold increment except few occasions
While other terms of penalty are clear enough, it has not been mentioned whether the normal increment falling during the period of penalty can be further withheld. But for three reasons, i.e., (i) the penalty cannot be given cumulative effect; (ii) the power to withhold such increments has not been expressly granted; and (ii) the penalty has been graded as “(iiia)” i.e., a lower penalty than the withholding of increments which stands graded as “(iv)”, the inference is that the disciplinary authority shall have no power to withhold normal increment(s) falling during the period of penalty
474. Withholding of Increments
An increment in a scale of pay is admissible to an employee as a matter of course unless it is withheld [F.R. 24). As a measure of punishment, the increment can be withheld to the extent permissible under the Disciplinary Rules. This penalty can be imposed for a specified period only. The withholding of increment may be with or without cumulative effect. If it is with cumulative effect, the period of penalty is excluded permanently from counting towards future increments in the time scale and, hence, the financial loss to the employee is recurring and severe.
475. Withholding of Increments
The withholding of increments due to failure to cross efficiency bar or non-compliance with a condition of service, such as passing a departmental test, does not constitute a penalty but such a rule cannot have a retrospective effect [O.P. Gupta v. State, SLR 1969 Pb.& Hr. 692]. Again, such a rule must also be reasonable. In one case, State of Punjab v. Sham Lal Murari, AIR 1975 SC 1177, the Supreme Court observed - “Passing petty tests after a petrifying length of dull official service is an odd insistence except in important levels of work.”
Post a Comment