It is his case that he apprised all W. The inspection of the documents is as good as giving the same to the petitioner as he was within his right to prepare notes on the basis of such inspection. The Inquiry Officer gave only one of the copies to the petitioner on the alleged ground that the petitioner’s copy will be given to him when he would submit his written brief. He would state, that the Inquiry Officer has not even discussed the defence set by the petitioner. Aggarwal that the penalty of stoppage of increments could not be with retrospective effect, the same is also appealing as I note, one of the impugned order was passed on June 26, whereby the four increments of the petitioner have been stopped. Inspecting documents meets the requirement of principles of natural justice. It is also a settled law, that only those documents which have been relied upon, by the employer need to be given.
It was also clearly indicated to the Ministry that the Corporation is proceeding with action for termination of his services from the Corporation. The findings of the Inquiry Officer are the following: I may state here that the Inquiry Officer in his report has stated; 1 there is no proof of the petitioner meeting Mr. Surely such documents were in the possession of the petitioner, and he could have produced the same. The respondent Corporation wrote to the petitioner again on August 17, giving him yet another opportunity to join duties by August 24,
The Inquiry Officer also referred to 73 other documents produced by the petitioner herein. Joseph on March 25, It is also a settled law, that only those documents which have been relied upon, by the employer need to be given. I may note, the plea of the petitioner that Mr. The inspection of the documents is as good as giving the same to the petitioner as he was within his right to prepare notes on the basis of such inspection.
The dead giveaway that tells you when Amazon has a better price.
It is noted, the petitioner had asked for documents which he had written. He simultaneously apprised the concerned Authorities in the respondent Corporation about the completion of his assignment with the Ministry by endorsing a copy of the covering letter to Mr.
On receipt of the same, the petitioner sent a telegraphic message to the respondent to Guwahati Refinery thereby stating that he was reaching Guwahati on August 26, for invalld to the respondent for duty. Joseph on January 07, What goes on a resume’s cover letter?
The appeal dated September 05 filed by the petitioner was also rejected vide impugned order dated December 08, After reporting for work at Guwahati Refinery on June 29,on November 01, the petitioner applied for sick leave for November 02, in combination of 7 days Special Compensatory off w.
The petitioner vide his communication dated February 20, requested the Inquiry Officer that no witness should be examined on that date. He denied that the Enquiry Officer had allowed the Presenting Officer to continue to examine the Management evidence in spite of the objections by the petitioner. The petitioner was chargesheeted for his alleged acts of misconduct and the same was received by him on December 24, Answered Jan 31, What is the best cover letter you have ever read or written?
Ramesh on 2 February, Accordingly, the cross examination of MW 2 Mr.
Corporate Logo : IOCL India : Oil and Gas Industry
In response thereto, it is averred that the petitioner has on April 15, sent an express telegram to the respondent, wherein he has stated ijvalid he has already given reasons for his overstaying in the leave being medical and had requested the respondent not to take any action till the receipt of detailed reasons.
The report of the Enquiry Officer was forwarded to the petitioner by a letter dated May 02, for making representation, if any against the findings of Enquiry officer within two months of the receipt of the Enquiry Report. Insofar as the submissions made by Mr. He also stated that the Enquiry Officer had directed the petitioner to file written submissions, although the petitioner sought time to file the same as the submissions were under preparation. It was further made clear to the Ministry that the Petitioner has not been assigned any task in connection with the vigilance case of the Ministry, and that he cannot be assigned any task either in letger Corporation or outside the Corporation.
He was, once again called to report for duty by April 15, with an explanation for his absence to the satisfaction of the respondent, failing which it will be presumed that he had left the services of the Corporation on his own accord.
The said communication was ketter by a detailed letter dated August 14, by the petitioner reiterating the stand. On September 08, the petitioner was served with an impugned order whereby his services were terminated by way of striking off his name from the rolls of the respondent Corporation with effect from August 25, It is also his case that on the directives of Mr. Enquiry proceedings were thereafter held on December 08, where the petitioner requested for time to prepare for the enquiry.
It was also clearly indicated to the Ministry that the Corporation is proceeding with action for termination of his services from the Corporation. Inspecting documents meets the requirement of principles of natural justice.
How can one apply for an internship at IOCL? What are some of the best sites to apply for internships in India? Insofar as the plea of Mr.
Agarwal, the impugned orders including the charge sheet dated December 13, suffers from the vice of non application of mind.