Sample Template Example of Inquiry Report against Employee for Fraud / Misbehaviour / Misconduct in India in word / .doc / pdf Free Download
You may Also Like :-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
You may Also Like :-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
Click Here For:-
ENQUIRY REPORT
Enquiry Report of Mr. Yagniah,
Enquiry Officer in relation to enquiry conducted into the charges leveled
against Mr. T Venkat Reddy, Job Opted Seasonal employee, No: 404108,
Centrifugal Operator, Process Department, Nizam Deccan Sugars Limited,
Mutyampet, Metpally Unit vide charge sheet dated 27.11.207.
The under
signed was appointed as Enquiry Officer vide a letter dated 19.02.2008 of the
Management of Nizam Deccan Sugars Limited, Metpally Unit to conduct Domestic
Enquiry into the charges leveled against Mr. T Venkat Reddy, Job Opted Seasonal
employee, Centrifugal Operator, Process Department, Nizam Deccan Sugars
Limited, Mutyampet, Metpally Unit vide charge sheet dated 27.11.2007, in the
Admn. Office of Nizam Deccan Sugars Limited, Mutyampet, Metpally Unit. Accordingly Mr. Venkat Reddy was intimated by
letter dated 12.03.2008 that enquiry would be conducted on 19.03.2008 from 2.30 PM onwards.
The enquiry
was commenced on 19.03.2008 at 2.30. PM., as was scheduled. Mr. M Suresh Reddy, Personnel Department, was
present as Presentation Officer on behalf of the Management
The
Charge-sheeted workman, Mr. T Venkat Reddy, was absent. Though, the enquiry was scheduled at 2.30. PM
the under signed waited for the charge-sheeted workman till 5.00 PM in the evening. But the CSW did not attend the enquiry.
In view of
his absence, the enquiry was postponed to 24.03.2008 at 2.30 PM in the same place and premises. Accordingly on the same day i.e., on
19.03.2007 I have issued an enquiry notice, intimating the CSW that I would
conduct the enquiry on 24.03.2008 from 2.30
PM on wards.
Again on
24.03.2008, the enquiry was resumed as scheduled in the Admn. Office of Nizam
Deccan Sugars Limited, Mutyampet, Metpally Unit at 2.30 PM. , as scheduled.
Mr. M Suresh
Reddy, Personnel Department, was present as Presentation Officer on behalf of
the Management.
Though, the
enquiry was scheduled at 2.30. PM, the undersigned waited till 3.30 PM for the Charge sheeted
workman, Mr. T Venkat Reddy. But he did
not attend the enquiry.
The Charge
sheeted workman was set ex-parte, as he failed to attend the enquiry on two
occasions i.e., 19.03.2008 and 24.03.2008, though he received the intimation of
conducting enquiry from the Enquiry Officer.
The CSW was given reasonable opportunity to defend the charges, but he
did not avail. Hence he was set ex-parte
and proceeded with the enquiry on 24.032008.
Charges in
brief as per charge-sheet dated 27.11.2007:
It was
alleged in the charge sheet dated 27.11.2007, issued to Mr T Venkat Reddy that
he was working as Centrifugal Operator (Job Opted Seasonal) in Process
Department; that vide transfer orders dated 08.10.2007 his services have been
transferred to Metpally Unit; that he was advised to join immediately at Metpally
Unit, in view of the exigencies of work and administrative reasons; that since
there was no response from his end nor joined to his duties once again he was
advised to report to duties by their Office letter dated 31.10.2007; that also
in his own interest, he was advised by another letter dated 07.11.2007, since
the season was being commenced on 13.11.2007; that inspite of transfer order
and repeated reminders he had not joined to his duties at Metpally unit till
that date; that they have received a letter dated 20.11.2007 without any valid
reasons; that his absence from 15.10.2007 will amount to unauthorized absence;
that on 10.11.2007 he has participated in a dharna organized by the TRS party;
that he has instigated co-workers to leave their workplaces and to participate
in the dharna along with him and that he was resorting to such activities which
may cause damage to the harmony and discipline of the other workers.
At the
outset, the Presentation Officer has placed the following documents, in the enquiry,
in seriatim and they were taken on record as Management Exhibits.
S
No
|
Date
|
Description
of the document
|
Ex.
No.
|
1
|
19.03.2008
|
Letter issued to the Enquiry
Officer by the Genera Manager, Metpally Unit that Mr. M Suresh Reddy will be
the Management Representative and will submit the necessary papers.
|
Ex. M1
|
2
|
O4.03.2008
|
Letter addressed by the General
Manager to the charge-sheeted workman that Mr. Yagniah has been appointed as
Enquiry Officer in the Place of Mr. G Suryam, to conduct the enquiry.
|
Ex. M2
|
3
|
06.12.2007
|
Intimating Mr G Suryam by the
General Manager that he was appointed as Enquiry Officer to conduct the
enquiry against the Charge-sheeted workman
|
Ex. M3
|
4
|
06.12.2007
|
Letter of General Manager
intimating the Charge-sheeted workman that Mr, G Suryam has been appointed as
Enquiry Officer
|
Ex. M4
|
5
|
27.11.2007
|
Charge-sheet issued by the Genera
manager to CSE and its acknowledgment
|
Ex. M5
|
6
|
04.12.2007
|
Explanation offered by Mr. T
Venkat Reddy to the Charge-sheet dated 27.11.2007
|
Ex. M6
|
7
|
08.122007
|
Transfer Order issued to the
Charge-sheeted workman.
|
Ex. M7
|
8
|
08.12.2007
|
Relieving Order of Mr. T Venkat
Reddy,
|
Ex. M8
|
9
|
27.10.2007
|
Representation of the CSW given to
the General Manager, Metpally
|
Ex. M9
|
10
|
31.10.2007
|
Letter addressed by the General
Manager to CSW asking him to come and join to duties.
|
Ex. M10
|
11
|
07.11.2007
|
Letter addressed by the General
Manager to CSW asking him to come and join to duties immediately
|
Ex. M11
|
12
|
12.112007
|
Copy of the letter by the General
Manager to General Manager, Metpally
|
Ex. M12
|
13
|
11.10.2007
|
Complaint given by Mr Ratan,
Security Officer, Medak to Genera manager, Medak.
|
Ex. M 13
|
14
|
24.01.2008
|
Copy of the letter by the General
Manager to General Manager, Metpally, with regard to the activities of Mr. T
Venkat reddy.
|
Ex. M14
|
15
|
28.02.2008
|
Copy of the letter by the General
Manager to General Manager, Metpally
|
Ex. M15
|
Statement of Sri B Soma Raju, Dy
General Manager (Process) – MW -1:
I am working
as Deputy General Manager (Process) since 2004 in Nizam Deccan Sugars Limited,
Metpally Unit. Earlier to this, I worked
as Head of the Process department in Medak and Shakarnagr Units of Nizam Decan
Sugars Limited.
I know the
Charge-sheeted Workman Mr. T Venkat reddy.
He has been working as Centrifugal Operator since 2002 in Nizam Deccan
Sugars Limited, Medak Unit. He is a job
Opted seasonal employee.
At our
Metpally Unit, as a part of modernization of the plant, we have installed two
new centrifugal machines (‘A’ side). The
workmen, who are working here, are new to these machines and they have no
working knowledge of these two machines.
Since these two machines are new ones and require an experienced
centrifugal operator to handle the machines carefully. In this background on my request, my General
Manager, Metpally had requested the General Manager, Medak to send one of their
experienced centrifugal operators to handle the new centrifugal machines for
this season 2007-08. We further
requested to send the operator, who is having experience, during the month of
October, to take trails of the new machines in the presence of the Principal
supplier of the machine
Accordingly
the Management transferred Mr. T Venkat reddy, Charge-sheeted workman,
Centrifugal operator as per Ex. M7 and he was relieved on the same date i.e.,
08.10.2007 by the General Manager, Medak (Ex. M8). But he did not join. Our General manager asked him twice (Ex. M10
& M 11) to come and join at Metpally.
Since the
CSW did not join to duties at Metpalli, inspite of repeated reminders of the
General Manager, Metpally, the General Manager issued charge-sheet dated
27.11.2007( Ex. M5), offering his explanation.
The explanation submitted by the CSW (Ex. M6) was not satisfactory,
intimated the CSW that an enquiry would be conducted against him (Ex. M4).
I further
submit that it is learnt from the Ex. M12 to 15 that the CSW has participated
in the Dharna organized by TRS on 10.11.2007 and provocated the employees
against the Management during the meeting and further that the CSW along with
Mr. P Siddi Ramulu Goud caused nuisance in front of the Factory main gate at
Medak and that CSW forcibly entered into the premises by pushing aside the
security people and also prevented the workers from attending to their duties.
Statement
of Mr. G Sridhar Reddy, Asst. manager (Personnel) – MW 2
I, G Sridhar
Reddy, am working as Asst. Manager (Personnel) since October 2007. I know the CSW. On exigencies of work Mr. T Venkat Reddy,
Centrifugal Operator (JOS, the CSW has been transferred to Metpally Unit and
was relieved on 08.10.2007 (Ex. M7 & 8).
But it has REPEATEDLY BEEN INFORMING BY THE General Manager, Metpally
Unit that the CSW has not joined to duties at Metpally and that he has
addressed letters to the CSW under Ex. M 10 & M 11 advising the CSW to join
to duties immediately. But inspite of
this the CSW did not join.
This being
the position, on 10.11.2007 the TRS, a local political party, has organized a
dharna at Medak and the CSW also participated in the said dharna. In the said dharna the CSW has provoked the
employees to agitate against the Management.
He further forcibly, along with his followers, entered into the factory
premises by pushing aside the security personnel at the gate. And also CSW pushed the security Officer, Mr.
Ratan, who on duty on that day and entered into the factory. I have also seen that the CSW was provocating
his co-employees to agitate. The above
incident was brought to the notice of the General Manager, Medak unit and in
turn the General Manager informed to GM Metpally Unit vide Ex. M12 and Ex.
M13. Likewise he further participated in
a meeting by Mr. Chukka Ramulu on 23.01.2008 and in a dharna organized by the
Job Opted Employees of NDSL, Medak Unit and behaved in above manner. The same has also been brought to the notice
of GM Metpally UNIT BY GM Medak Unit (Ex. M14 & M15).
It is true
that he is an Office bearer of the said Union . But he is not a protected workman. As per rules laid down, any union has to make
an application to the Management for
recognizing the list of Office Bearers supplied by the Union
as Protected Workmen. In turn the
Management has to recognize the said workmen/Office bearers as Protected
Workmen and to be intimated to the Union in
writing. But in this case the Union had not made any application so far to the
Management for recognizing certain number of Office Bearers as Protected
Workmen or the CSW. The CSW is creating
problems and causing disturbance for smooth running of the crushing season.
Statement
of Mr. B Ratan, Security Officer, Nizam Deccan Sugars Limited, Medak Unit – MW
-3
I, B Ratan,
am working as Security Officer through Front line management Serices for Nizam
Deccan Sugars Limited, Medak Unit. I
know the CSW, Mr. T Venkat reddy. I was
told that he was transferred to Metpally Unit.
On 10.11.2007, the TRS has organized a Dharna infront of the Factory
gate from 10.00.AM to 5.00 PM . I was on duty on that day and I was asked to
be at the gate to avoid unforeseen disturbances. On that day the CSW Mr. T Venkat reddy and
Mr. P Siddi Ramulu Goud have come and joined in the Dharna. Both CSW and Mr. Siddi Ramulu Goud have
exerted pressure and they created a scene in front of the gate by threatening
the officials, if they were not taken into service. At one time Mr. Venkat reddy did not heed to
the advices and crash the gate into the factory by pushing away my security
guards, who are on duty, in which two of the guards fell down. The CSW shouted on me and pushed me aside and
entered into the factory premises. The
CSW also called the workers who are going to the shift to join him and thus
prevented the workmen from attending to their duties. This incident has been brought to the notice
of the General Manager, Medak in writing (Ex. M13).
Evaluation of evidence and findings:
A Charge
sheet dated 27.11.2007 was issued to Mr. T Venkat reddy, Job Opted Seasonal
employee, EMP No: 404108, Centrifugal Operator, Process Department, Nizam
Deccan Sugars Limited, Mutyampet, Metpally Unit making certain allegations
against him, out of which the following issued arise for determination.
Issue No: 1: whether Mr. T Venkat Reddy has disobeyed the
Transfer orders of General Manager, Medak.
Issue No: 2: whether Mr T venkat
reddy has participated in the Dharna and tried to enter into the Factory premises
forcibly.
Issue No: 3: whether Mr. T Venkat
Reddy has resorted to such activities which may cause damage to the harmony and
discipline of the other workers.
Issue No: 4: Whether Mr T Venkat
reddy is a protected workman.
MW1 stated
in his evidence that as a part of modernization of the plant, we have installed
two new centrifugal machines (‘A’ side) and that the workmen, who are working
there, are new to these machines and they have no working knowledge of these
two machines. Further that they need an
experienced centrifugal Operator to handle the machines. He further stated that they requested the
General Manager to send him in October for taking trails. He has not joined to duties inspite of
reminders of General Manager, Metpally.
MW2 stated in
his evidence that the CSW has participated in the dharna organized by the TRS
Party. In the said dharna the CSW has
provoked the employees to agitate against the Management. He further forcibly, along with his
followers, entered into the factory premises by pushing aside the security
personnel at the gate. And also CSW
pushed the security Officer, Mr. Ratan, who on duty on that day and entered
into the factory. Likewise he further
participated in a meeting by Mr. Chukka Ramulu on 23.01.2008 and in a dharna
organized by the Job Opted Employees of NDSL, Medak Unit on 27.01.2008 and
behaved in above manner. MW2 further
stated that Mr. T Venkat Reddy is not a protected workman as the Union had not made any application so far to the
Management for recognizing certain number of Office Bearers as Protected
Workmen or the CSW. CSW is creating
problems and causing disturbance for smooth running of the crushing season.
MW-3 stated
in his evidence that on 10.11.2007; the TRS has organized a Dharna in front of the
Factory gate from 10.00.AM to 5.00 PM . He was on duty on that day and he was asked
to be at the gate to avoid unforeseen disturbances that the CSW Mr. T Venkat
reddy and Mr. P Siddi Ramulu Goud have come and joined in the Dharna. That Mr. Venkat reddy did not heed to the
advices and crash the gate into the factory and that the CSW shouted him and
pushed him aside and entered into the factory premises. The CSW also called the workers who are going
to the shift to join him and thus prevented the workmen from attending to their
duties.
It can be
seen from the above statements of MW1 to Mw3 that the services of the CSW are
required at Metpally Unit, He has not joined at Metpally inspite of the
reminders of the General Manager Metpally, He has participated in the Dharna
and other meetings at Medak and he forcibly entered into the Factory and
provoked the co-workers to agitate against the Management.
I have also
perused the reply, Ex. M6, submitted by the CSW to the charge-sheet. The stand taken by the CSW that he had not
received the Transfer Order or relieving order; that he cannot be transferred
when the wage revision meeting was pending before the ACL and that he is a
protected workman etc. are no way helpful to the CSW and the CSW is avoiding
the transfer on some pretext or the other.
Being a
senior employee of the Organization, he ought to have honored the orders of the
Management keeping in view of the requirement of his services at Metpally and
ought to have joined at Metpally. But he
failed to do so. It clearly shows the
indifferent attitude of the CSW.
As discussed
above there is corroborative evidence of MW1, Mw2 and Mw3. A close reading of the evidence and the
documents filed during course of the enquiry it is evident that the CSW had not
joined to his duties at Metpally Unit as per transfer orders Ex. M7; he had
participated in the Dharna organized by TRS on 10.11.2007 and in a meeting held
on 23.01.2008 and on 27.01.2008 as per Ex. M12, M13, M14 and M15. And also it has also been established by the
statements of MW 2 and MW 3 that CSW had participated in the Dharna and other
meetings and had forcibly entered into the Factory premises by pushing away the
Security Personnel. I have no hesitation
to hold that he was resorting to such activities which may cause damage to the
harmony and discipline of the other workers as alleged.
In
conclusion, I would like to say that all the charges mentioned in the charge
sheet dated 27.11.2007( Ex. M5) are proved beyond doubt and I have, therefore, no hesitation to hold that
Mr. T Venkat Reddy guilty of committing misconducts as alleged in the charge
sheet.
Enquiry Officer
Download Domestic Enquiry Report Format:-
For Cheating, Fraud, Misconduct, Misbehaviour & Disciplinary Action
Nice work. But in the inquiry report it is said that the charges are held proved beyond reasonable doubt. As far as I know, in Domestic inquiry the standard of Proof is "Preponderance of Probability" and not "beyond reasonable doubt" .
ReplyDeleteVery useful, notice that strict court rules do not apply, as such proving beyond reasonable is not necessary.
ReplyDelete