29.03.2013 Views

TTD - Board Cell, Tirupati - Sri G. Kesava Raju, Asst/Shroff ...

TTD - Board Cell, Tirupati - Sri G. Kesava Raju, Asst/Shroff ...

TTD - Board Cell, Tirupati - Sri G. Kesava Raju, Asst/Shroff ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

BOARD CELL,<br />

B2/ 36655 / 98.<br />

Sub:<br />

<strong>TTD</strong> - <strong>Board</strong> <strong>Cell</strong>, <strong>Tirupati</strong> - <strong>Sri</strong> G. <strong>Kesava</strong> <strong>Raju</strong>,<br />

<strong>Asst</strong>/<strong>Shroff</strong> - Punished with stoppage of One Increment<br />

with cumulative effect for having absented to duty<br />

unauthorlzedly from 29-10-96 to 9-8-97 - Appeal filed -<br />

placed before <strong>TTD</strong> <strong>Board</strong> of Trustees - Regarding.<br />

1) Proc Roc No DA5/44742 / 96, dt 23-7-98<br />

2) Appeal Dt 31-10-98 of <strong>Sri</strong> G <strong>Kesava</strong> <strong>Raju</strong>, <strong>Asst</strong>/<strong>Shroff</strong><br />

Ref:<br />

NOTE<br />

1. <strong>Sri</strong> G. <strong>Kesava</strong> <strong>Raju</strong>, <strong>Asst</strong>/<strong>Shroff</strong> was punished with stoppage of One<br />

increment with cumulative effect for having absented to duty unauthorizedly and<br />

the period of unauthorized absence was treated as "Dies-Non" vide Proc Roc<br />

No DA5/44742/96, dt 23-7-98<br />

2. Aggrieved by the said orders of punishment he filed the present<br />

appeal before <strong>TTD</strong> <strong>Board</strong> of Trustees under Section 120(i) of Act 30/87 duly<br />

affixing the requisite court fee stamps with tn the time stipulated, with a request<br />

to set-aside the orders of punishment and to treat the "Dies-Non" period as leave<br />

for which he is eligible<br />

FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF<br />

3. The <strong>Asst</strong> Exe Officer(Potu), <strong>Sri</strong> T T , Tirumala in his letters dt 31-<br />

10-96, 14-11-96, 3-12-96 & 7-11-97 reported that <strong>Sri</strong> G <strong>Kesava</strong> <strong>Raju</strong>,<br />

<strong>Asst</strong>/<strong>Shroff</strong> has initially availed weekly off on 28-10-96 and applied CPL for Two<br />

days on 29 & 30-10-96 Further reported that the said individual had not turned<br />

up to duty from 30-10-96 onwards The said individuals has given a Telegram on<br />

1-11-96 for sanction of CPL on 31-10-96. He has also given Telegram dt<br />

4-11-96 for sanction of leave from 1-11-96 to 9-11-96 and again extended the<br />

leave upto 20-11-96 by giving another Telegram. Later on also he requested for<br />

extension of leave on piece meal basis by sending leave letters Thus the period<br />

from 28-10-96 to 5-8-97 is left without any regularization and requested to take<br />

further action (the said individual on transfer, joined duty at S V Junior College,<br />

<strong>Tirupati</strong> on 6-8-97 FN<br />

4. Basing on the said report of the <strong>Asst</strong> Exe Officer (Potu), <strong>Sri</strong> TT ,<br />

Tirumala the following Four charges were leveled against <strong>Sri</strong> G <strong>Kesava</strong> <strong>Raju</strong>,<br />

<strong>Asst</strong>/<strong>Shroff</strong>. Vide memorandum of charge Roc No DA5/44742 /97, dt 31-12-97


h<br />

t /if-G<br />

Charge No. 1: "that you have availed weekly off on 28-10-96 and extended<br />

leave from 29-10-96 to 30-10-96 stating that your father is<br />

suffering from fever. Again you have extended leave by way<br />

of telegrams upto 15-12-96 in piece meal. You have neither<br />

taken prior permission or submitted the leave application well<br />

in advance. It clearly shows that you have stayed away to<br />

duty unauthorisedly. Thus you have exhibited your gross<br />

negligence, indiscipline and insubordinate attitude".<br />

Charge No. 2: "that you have again applied for leave from 1-1-97 to 15-1-97<br />

and from 16-1-97 to 31-1-97 through telegrams stating that<br />

your father is seriously ill. But no mention was made for the<br />

period from 16-12-96 to 31-12-96 and remained absent<br />

unauthorisedly without any leave application. A memo was<br />

issued on 12-2-97 directing to submit your explanation within<br />

7 days. In your explanation dt. 21-3-97 you have stated that<br />

on 30-10-96 you went to your native place. Due to<br />

development of temperature and pains all over body, you<br />

extended your leave upto 31-10-96. There was no<br />

development in your health and according to your relatives<br />

your behaviour was strange and becoming sub-conscious at<br />

times. Therefore you were given treatment by both the<br />

exoreist and physician at your native place. Thus leave<br />

applied and explanation submitted were contrary. It reveals<br />

your misconduct, indiscipline and callous attitude".<br />

Charge No. 3 "that you being a regular employee it is your duty to submit the<br />

leave application to your officer and obtain permission or<br />

sanction of leave well in advance. If necessary extension has<br />

to be made with sufficient causes. Due to your willful and<br />

continuous absence much inconvenience and dislocation is<br />

caused to the official work. Thus you have exhibited your<br />

gross indiscipline and misconduct".<br />

Charge No. 4: "that you have not obtained prior permission to leave the<br />

Headquarters besides you have also not mentioned about<br />

your residential address keeping the administration in dark to<br />

send any official communication to you which is contrary to<br />

the rules. Thus it reveals you carelessness and indiscipline<br />

attitude".<br />

5. in reply to the said memorandum of charge dt. 31-12-97, the<br />

appellant submitted his explanation dt. 30-3-98 stating that by availing weekly off<br />

on 28-10-96, he proceeded to his native place and due to severe fever and body<br />

pains he has not attended duty on 29-10-96 and thus he extended the leave on<br />

peace meal basis and therefore requested to drop further action against him. In


Poyt Hv 9<br />

the form-l, enclosed along with his explanation, the appellant mentioned that he<br />

doesn't want any enquiry and requested to excuse him for the inconvenience<br />

caused.<br />

6. After careful examination of the entire issue and taking all the factors<br />

into consideration, <strong>Sri</strong> G. <strong>Kesava</strong> <strong>Raju</strong>, <strong>Asst</strong>/<strong>Shroff</strong> was punished with stoppage<br />

of One Increment with cumulative effect exclusive of leave periods and the<br />

period of unauthorized absence to duty from 29-10-96 to 5-8-97 was treated as<br />

"Dies-Non" vide Proc. Roc No. DA5/44742 /96 dt. 23-7-98.<br />

7. Aggrieved by the said orders of punishment he filed an appeal<br />

before the <strong>TTD</strong> <strong>Board</strong> with a request to set-aside the punishment orders and to<br />

treat the period as leave for which he is eligible instead of treating it as<br />

"Dies-non".<br />

8. The appeal of <strong>Sri</strong> G. <strong>Kesava</strong> <strong>Raju</strong>, <strong>Asst</strong>/ <strong>Shroff</strong>, along with remarks<br />

on the grounds of appeal was placed before <strong>TTD</strong> <strong>Board</strong>. The <strong>TTD</strong> <strong>Board</strong> in its<br />

Res.No.649, dt. 17-1-2004 has Adjourned the subject. Hence the matter is<br />

again placed before the <strong>TTD</strong> <strong>Board</strong> for taking a decision.<br />

"Hp rd the aooellant and perused the records.<br />

Punishment cjnfirmed. Tne period of: absence<br />

may j>e tre jted as leciVe t >r whica he is<br />

eli^ioxe it ne agrees for the same" *<br />

Sd/- Chairman<br />

<strong>TTD</strong>, <strong>Board</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!