- This Question is empty.
August 9, 2012 at 6:11 am #67784
A Government Servent has been suspended since17-02-2012pm. His departmental proceeding also has drawn against him. Findings of the proceeding also submitted by the Enquery Officer to the Appointing Authority on 08-06-2012. The same was delivered to the Charged Officer on 08-08-2012. There were no case has been lodged before any court of law. The Charged Officer also asked to submit his reply on the findings of the proceeding. The charged officer is still under oder of suspension. The service condition of the charged officer is very much critical, the person has been appointed under Police Act 1853 as a Constable of West Bengal Police. Got promotion to the rank of Wireless Operator in 2002, after giving option to join the Wireless Departmentc and successfully passing the departmental examination. In the contrary his service used to control by West Bengal Servents Conduct Rules 1959 & West Bengal Service Rules 1971.
My question is that whether the entire process of suspension is lawful or not? What steps may be taken by the employee against injustice?August 9, 2012 at 10:59 am #73597
Departmental enquiries are mainly based on violation of departmental rules and proceedings observing the priniciples of natural justice. The gravity of offence plays very important role in withdrawing the suspension order. The WBSR Part 1 is not applicable on the police personnel of subordinate rank in view of the explanation given below the rule 2. Orders governing the conditions of services are issued from Home (Police) Department.However, such long suspension does not hold good in the eyes of the law. What are the findings of the E.O in this case? Has he found him guilty? Pursuant to the findings if the penalty is imposed then the police man would get nothing more what he has already taken as S.A. However, he may file Appeal with his Appellate Authority and if he is not satisfied then may move to SAT. There is a G.O of 1967 that any proceeeding continuing beyond a period of 5 months where the witnesses are local and 7 months where the witnesses are from other cities is malafide if the Charged officer has not adopted any dilly dallying tactics. For ruling on the above subject the case of State of W.B Vs Tapan Kumar Saha (Calcutta High Court) may be studied in which the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court had declared the proceeding against Sergeant Tapan Kumar Saha as illegal and malafide. Apex Court also stood by the decision of the High Court.August 9, 2012 at 2:28 pm #73598
Thank you for your reply. But the concerned person got reply from the SPIO of Telecom, West Bengal that his appointment was made as per Police Act. And his service is dealt with the West Bengal Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1959 and West Bengal Service Rules, 1971. There is nothing others like Police Regulations of Bengal 1943 or else like the General Subordinate Police Staffs of West Bengal Police.
As far my knowledge – All the Police persons of the Union of India are appointed with strength of Police Act 1853, and the service of them controlled by the specific state Police Regulations for the State Police and for the Central Police Organizations they have seperate rules.
Eg. a subordinate police person of Uttar Pradesh can be appointed with the strength of Police Act, 1853 but his service should be controlled by the UP Police Manual or like that. Similarly for the Kolkata police – Police Regulations, Kolkata (PRC), for West Bengal Police – it is Police Regulation of Bengal.
So. enlighten the matter on the above context please.August 10, 2012 at 1:20 pm #73609
The appointments in the subordinate ranks of police forces are made under Police Act 1861 and in Kolkata Police under Calcutta Police Act 1866. please read the WBSR Part 1 Rule 2 explanation where it is written that WBSR Part 1 and not Part II ia not applicable upon the subordinate staff of police forces of WBP or KP. The governing regulations are PRC 1968 Part1 for KP and PRB 1943 for WBP. He should have asked the SPIO as to which of the regulations or Manuals are applicable upon his rank or upon the ranks of wireless branch people. If he is appointed as a police staff and due to his expertise is posted in wireless branch on opting out serve as a wireless operator then I am afraid PRB 1943 will not be applicable because the conditions of services of both the jobs are different. West Bengal Government Servants conduct Rules 1959 are only applicable on Police and jail staff. The rules for rest of the employees have been repealed in 1980 by another rule known as WBS(DR&O)Rules 1980.Please inform me that he is a police staff or a non police staff. merely working in police department does not make a person a police officer. To become a police officer a certificate under section 8 is issued under Police Act 1861. There are ministreal staff, scavangers, Group D staff etc. My main question is what is his status? Is he a police staff or non police staff? If a non police member then the entire proceeding is vitiated because it had been drawn under WBGSC Rules 1959 which is not applicable upon him. This is violation of the principles of natural justice. It should be challenged before the appropriate forum but before that he will have to know the rules as to under which rule he had opted to work as wireless operator and what is his basic pay and grade pay and with which rank of police his service is at par in the matter of salary and allowances.August 11, 2012 at 3:27 pm #73611
I am in contact with some of my police sources in KP and WBP and would revert back to you after gathering information about the service conditions and applicable rules upon the members of the police forces who are working in tele communication department. Meanwhile, I have come to know that Govt. is considering to separate the telecommunication department from the police force for curtailing the additional expenses like rationing allowance and one month’s extra salary for working on holidays which the present staff of telecommunication departments also get. However, let me first confirm the facts and figures then I would be able to contact you.August 11, 2012 at 3:55 pm #73613
I like to inform you that, the present problem is only with the State Police Telecom personnel, not for Kolkata Police Personnel.
I like to confirm you that Government has already passed the order to delete the status of the Wireless Staffs as Police person in a govt order dated 12-10-2010. By which it has been deleted the Police status conferred to the Wireless staffs in a GO of 1960. The point to be noted that the Wireless staffs are never been under the control of Police Regulations of Bengal, 1943. There are none approved Rules regarding Recruitment, Lateral entry from the General Police Force, Promotion, Transfer policy. In reply to a RTI application it has been replied from the authority as they have no such information available with them. But they are only appointed under Police Act, 1853.
In the GO of 1960 the three ranks of Telecom WB equated with the three ranks of General Police Force, e.g. Wireless (Telecom) Inspectors ~ Inspector of Police; Supervisor (Grade I & II) ~ Sub Inspector of Police and Wireless Operators ~ Assistant Sub Inspectors of Police.
But Supervisor (I) is a promotional post from the Rank of Supervisor (II), where as, there is no separate promotional post present in the rank of Sub-Inspectors of Police.August 12, 2012 at 1:32 pm #73617
Your appointment may have been under Police Act 1861 but when by a subsequebt order of the Governor passed under Article 309 the telecommunication personnel of erstwhile police force have been segregated from the police branch then any proceeding under conduct rules of 1959 is null and void. The proceeding should have been instituted under the Rules of 1980.So any findings arrived at in the proceeding under rules of 1959 will be malafide and vitiated. By the way can you provide the order no which has segregated the telecommunication branch staff from the police staff. If possible please arrange to post the scanned copy on this forum. After study of the said order any definite opinion can be given.August 12, 2012 at 2:21 pm #73618
I think I have not informed you that, the person have been charged with 11 numbers of charges out of which 3 of them are of Rule 951, 108, 888, 889 of Police Regulation of Bengal, 1943, and Rule 21 of West Bengal Service Conduct Rules, 1959 other 8 having no rules referred. The main grievance of the department is of that the person was hammering the Telecommunication, West Bengal; West Bengal Police Directorate; Home Department as well as to Governor of West Bengal through the RTI Applications.
I am providing you the relevant Government Orders (scanned copy) for your reference. In all the papers it is clearly proved that the Wireless staffs are not at per or equal to the General Police staff even there is no clear cut evidence which can prove that the wireless employees are even police.
On the basis of these papers the person filed several RTI applications but PIOs are avoiding information.August 23, 2012 at 8:56 pm #73739
The person have got the award of punishment. The authority awarded him 3 yr Increment stop with future effect, 187 days suspension period confirmed.
The most unprecedented matter is that, the person has also been transferred to a remote part of a backward district – the order is not made as punishment but anyone can understand that after cancellation of the general transfer order – which was due to the person, the person have been newly posted during mid-term as well as on the same day when his 187 days suspension has been withdrawn, award of punishment also declared.
So advise openly for him how the person can fight against so called “Natural Justice”?
- You must be logged in to reply to this Question.