Delaying hike for abusing superiors and co-staff fair punishment: HC

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: The High Court of Karnataka has dismissed a petition by a manager of the helicopter division of the Hindustan Aeronautical Limited (HAL) challenging the punishment meted out to him for being in the “habit of neglecting his work and not performing the tasks assigned by his superiors.”

It was also alleged that he had abused and misbehaved with his co-employees and superiors.

The HC said that the punishment of postponement of one increment with cumulative effect was fair.

“In my view, having regard to the fact that a proper enquiry was conducted, in which the petitioner was afforded a complete opportunity to defend himself, the findings recorded by the enquiry officer that the charges had been established cannot be found fault,” the HC said in its judgement on a petition filed by Bishnu Prasad Baliar Singh.

He was originally punished with postponement of five increments but it was reduced to one increment by the appellate authority.

Noting this, Justice NS Sanjay Gowda said, “Further, taking into consideration that the appellate authority took the lenient view of reducing the punishment from postponement of five increments to postponement of one increment with cumulative effect, the petitioner has been dealt with fairly and an appropriate punishment has also been awarded.”

Singh had filed one more petition before the HC challenging another punishment for misconduct. He was charge-sheeted with two articles of charge.

The first one was that he had refused to do certain tasks and had refused to continue unfinished tasks, and the second charge was that when he was called by his superior to discuss and set his tasks, he had told him that he was not willing to set up any task.

The enquiry found him guilty and the Disciplinary Authority imposed the punishment of postponement of one increment of pay with cumulative effect which was also confirmed by the Appellate Authority.

In this case, Singh’s punishment was reduced by the HC which stated, “Having regard to the fact that the charges alleged against the petitioner was only of partial completion of the task assigned to him, in my view, the punishment of postponement of one increment with cumulative effect would be disproportionate.”

Reducing the sentence, the HC said, “In my view, it would be appropriate to impose the punishment of postponement of one increment without cumulative effect, instead.” (WP 29363/2015 WP 7230/2020)