Index-

S Brief details Page No.

No.
1. Chronological datewise events 1-18
2. Annexure-1 W. P. 4007/2012 petitioner NIACL 18-25
respondent Ministry of Labour
3. Annexure-2 GIPSA is regulator of general insurance 26-27
PSUs
4. Annexure 3- W. P. 4575/2007 petitioner workman 28-32
respondent NIACL stay orders not to transfer workman
5. Annexure-4 RTI reveals it is mandatory to 33
communicate why specific penalty of dismissal etc
should not be awarded
6. Annexure 5-Order dated 5/11/2009 ex-parte enquiry 34
for permanent reduction of 6 increments (1.the
workman did not participate because no charge sheet
was ever delivered to him as per procedure stipulated
2. It was issued consequent to CVC direction to ensure
no harassment is caused to workman in any manner 3.
6 increments withdrawn to equate workman as assistant,his pay start is 6
increments higher to assistant)
7. Annexure 6- Dismissal Order dated 16/11/2009 35
8. Annexure 7- Chairman NIACL Order 9.06.2011 he sets 36-40
aside penalties and appellate authorities Orders (after 13
months of pending memorial, reasonable time limit is 6 months)
9. Annexure 8-Transfer Order to Ahmedabad 41
22/06/2011(issued despite industrial dispute
proceedings with ALC)
10. Reminder to above 23/11/2011 42
11. Annexure 9:- Ministrys reference 3/11/2011 43
 1

25/05/2017

Dy CLC, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Ajmer.

Kind attention:- Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma,Dy CLC.

Sir,

Re:- justice for a workman facing violation of labour laws.

Workman (Hindi Translator)

V/s The General Insurers Public Sector Association (GIPSA) &

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd (NIACL)

With reference to my personal interaction on 23/5/2017 I bring the

following events to enable you understand the background of atrocities
of an abusive employer ,its association suffered by the workman-in-
person:- Abbreviations:-

PSU Public Sector Undertakings

RTI Citizens access to information as per the Right to
Information Act, 2005,its object was empowerment of a
citizen to enable him expose the red tape/corruption
GIC General Insurance Corporation of India , when the workman
joined during during 1988 as Hindi Translator, it was the holding
corporation of NIACL,then 1 of the 4 subsidiary companies of
GIC.
OICL Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd, Registered Office Delhi
UIICL United India Insu. Co. Ltd, Registered Office Chennai
NICL National Insurance Co. Ltd, Registered Office Kolkata
RDA Referred for disciplinary action, when the law enforcement
agency against corruption (CBI etc) traps/raids one or more bribe
takers/corrupt officials, it usually recommend RDA major .
 2

S. No. Date/Year Event

1. 1980s Hindi Translator post introduced in the GIC
HS/C-1-5/88 public sector insurance companies
28.01.1988 Duties of Hindi Translator issued by NIACL
2 24.02.1988 Workman appointed to the designation of
Hindi Translator by the NIACL on mandatory
qualifications of second class graduate, a class
1 officers minimum qualification is that of
graduate in LIC/GIC PSUs
3. 13.06.1988 Formal Appointment Order issued to
workman, pay start six increments higher to
that of an assistant; as it was a new post, a
separate pay scale remain awaited.
1988 GIC issues instructions to all subsidiary
insurance company about higher pay start of
Hindi Translators

4. RC- 26(A)\ 1991 CBI Jaipur investigates the then cash theft
from NIACL office cash at Jaipur ; refers NIACL
for RDA major.

The key of cash box was with two persons,

branch manager and cashier, management of
NIACL colludes to subsequently alter the theft
to burglary, to cover up the misconduct the
insurance claim is paid on account of burglary;
the then doubtful integrity cashier is presently
a respectable office-in-charge of NIACL with
bright future promoted at least 4 times since
then.
 3

31.10.1991 Written directions that if a Hindi Translator

OICL seeks transfer as Assistant he should be asked
to forego additional increments.

5. February 2001 Workman reaches stagnation of pay scale,

regular increments stopped,henceforth
stagnation increments after two years

NIACL Jaipur Enquiry Officer informs that

penalty of reduction of two increments is
awarded against a few NIACL officials,
complaint against them was not only
watching PORN but also drinking liquor in
almost nude condition allegedly, in the course
of their duty in the Bikaner office of NIACL.

6. January 2003 NIACLs Kalyan sahai is caught red -handed

extorting bribe by the anti corruption bureau
Jaipur, his suspension revoked after few days,
his job security continues. After a decade he
becomes secretary of an association of NIACL
Jaipur RO,is seen welcoming the NIACLs ex-
officio chairman,A. R. Sekar, as on 20.07.2012
 4

29.09.2003 Junior persons, e.g. salary no. 24449

promoted by NIACL, ignoring workmans
seniority.

7. 2006-07 Workmans is appreciated,his article on RTI is

published by NIACLs Jaipur magazine.

27.02.2007 NIACL reference to GIPSA: Injustice in denial

of pay and promotion to Hindi Translators

8. 10.05.2007 Workman writes notice cum representation

to chairman NIACL seeking justice to Hindi
Translators
9. 5.06.2007 A transfer order is issued to workman as a
crooked attempt to abolish the lawful post of
Hindi Translator; no order of relieving the
workman is issued (till date there is no order).
Petitioner has to spend almost a month of his
10. 28.06.2007 salary for taking shelter of high court.
S. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4575/2007 is
registered in Jaipur High Court ;Petitioner is
the workman respondent is NIACL

11. 30.07.2007 Rajasthan High Court grants stay orders in

respect of transfer order dated 5.06.2007

12. 30.08.2007 NIACL RTI reply: a non matriculate cannot be

promoted as Hindi Translator
(however,most of the non-matriculate
employees at the time of appointment of
workman are promoted as assistant or sr
asstt)
 5

13. 24.09.2007 Workman gets reply that balance of leave in

his account cannot be disclosed as leave for
21/6/2007 to 31/7/2007 is pending for
sanction with Jaipur R. O. (of NIACL).

14. 11.10.2007 Parliamentary Committee on Official

Language raises the issue of alteration in the
name of Hindi Translators on written
complaint of the workman.

15 16.01.2008 Assurance by Head Office NIACL to

Parliamentary Committee to investigate the
issue and reply back to parliamentary
committee. (It remains pending till date).

16. 24.02.2008 Ministry of Finance Office Memorandum

Reminder** that NAME of official language posts shall be
2.05.2013 same as that of Central Secretariat Official
Language Cadre,**DO issued by Ministry of
Home Affairs, the nodal agency for the
official language act and Rules

17. 24 February Because of workplace jealousy the following

2008 so called gyapan is communicated to
workman,on the basis of investigation of an
advocate:-
Only grave act alleged in several pages of
the aforesaid is that of leaving
headquarters, quoting the CDA Rules of
1975, it is stated that the integrity of
 6

workman is not in keeping with that of a

public servant.

18. April 2008 Well known Bribe takers, alleged thieves of

public money enjoy job security, the honest
workman is subjected to isolation, forced to
suspension, complaints the Central Vigilance
commission (CVC) the nodal agency against
abuse of public office, abuse of power.

29/04/2008 CVC takes cognizance, directs NIACL to

OM reference No, ensure that no harassment is caused to
Conf/1463/08
workman in any manner.
The directions remain on paper till date.

19. 10/3/2008 to NIACL written submission under oath of God to

21/10/ 2011*** Rajasthan High Court:- it is a state under article 12 of
the constitution of India; petitioner**was initially
appointed on the post of hindi translator; regularized
Writ petition on the post ; post was created to implement the
4575/2007 provisions of Rajbhasha Act 1963 ; Reply to
 7

Shri Gopal Soni grounds: The petitioner* *is definitely holding

V/s NIACL the post of Hindi Translator; can further be
promoted to the Officer cadre.. (**workman)
6 May 2008 RTI reply:-Manager,Hindi NIACL Mumbai
informs that translators issue is taken up by
Parliamentary Committee,referred to GIPSA

20. 3/06/2008 Printed and published conduct rules as per

amendments booklet by NIACL is GI (CDA) Rules
upto 31.12.2007 1975(general insurance conduct discipline
appeal rules). RTI information HO/CPI
Cell/2008/56 by one Inderjeet Singh
..
the writing on the wall is the so called
12/06/2008 insubordination and misconduct of
workman , already taken for granted (even
before the process of enquiry) :-

14.11.2008 LIC to workman:- Our disciplinary process*,being

based upon Principles of natural justice,the
enquiry/investigation officer without prior
intimation to charge sheeted employee (CSE)
cannot include deposition of any fresh witness
 8

than that of pre-declared. NIACL ignores the said

ethics. (Please refer S. No. 22)

21. 19 January 2009 Mrs. Gopa Ray GM Chief Vigilance Officer,

NIACL, writes letter to CVC in respect of
workman.
CVO NIACL stresses the specialized
designation of workman as Hindi
Translator 3 times.
In house magazine of NIACL appreciates
inter alia, her values and ethics in work
culture which should be embibed by each
and every employee ..
11.02.2009
Corruption in NIACL Jaipur News published
in most of newspapers. One B. K. gupta is
caught taking bribe in the course of his
duties of NIACL, Jaipur; enjoyed full pay
during so called inquiry, he was never
subjected to suspension even for one day.
In respect of Bribe taking reported at Jaipur NIACL,no
one put to suspension ,NIACLs Head Office
Vigilance Officials RTI reply :-applicant has
expressed his opinion about state of corruption in its
confirmation asked information about third party,
hence denied.
The ethics is that even an exempted body, e.g. CBI
cannot deny info of corruption of employees.
22.
15.05.2009 In violation of ethics as per LIC RTI S. no.
20,One Mr. Khangarot alleges the workman
dupes money worth millions. (translated) " Mr.
Soni used to report me for legal and Hindi
department, he used to pollute the atmosphere by
 9

not working during office time-He often used

bilingual and non parliamentary language and
called officers as thieves saying CRM to SDM all
are corrupt- he himself (that is, Mr. Soni) was
involved in her-pher worth millions..
Aforesaid hate mongering person is promoted.

Suspension forced against workman, 1975 rules; none

April 2008
of the NIACL corrupt officials were placed under
suspension upto ratification of dismissal of workman.
14.05.2008 B.P.Yadav*,manager replies RTI that Rule 1(3) of
GICDA Rules1975 is applicable to him.

8.06.2009 LIC reply: The disciplinary authority is required to

submit complete enquiry/investigation report before
taking a decision in the matter of charged employee.
Workman represents above to NIACL.
The said report remains denied till date.
27.06.2009
A. R. Sekar (Photo with bribe taker in s. No.6
)NIACLs senior most General Managers order
to workman: RTI forwarded by National
Human Rights Commission:
It (the workmans access to information under
RTI) is a crude attempt to confuse the
different authorities and an attempt to escape
from the due process of law
23.
November 2009 For the benefit of crooked decision makers the
Punitive (CDA) Rules are altered from retrospective
effect, NIACL hires yet another advocate to get the
workman subjected to several penalties including
dismissal upon NIAC (CDA) Rules 2003.
Penalty orders are issued by One Mr. Kundra,
Manager NIACL not competent to appoint a Hindi
Translator.
 10

24. 29.10.2009 Atul Sahai, Chief Manager,NIACL, Corporate HRM

Corp.HRM/CL1 Cell/ directs:- Gratuity cannot be forefeited unless
MP-137/2009
the penalty of forefeiture is mentioned in
Penalty Order.
25. 13.05.2010 A notice (reference nil) in the name of
workman signed by a manager,Jaipur NIACL
that gratuity of the workman is forefeited.

26. 5 January 2009 RTI: Workman seeks discretionary powers of

officials in the NIACL
Absolute Corp.HRM:IDD: 2009 responds :-
authority in discretionary powers of an
public life is individual/authority fall under the realm of
rampant pure discretion.
27. 12/02/2009 CDA Rules published on the intranet of
NIACL
It is informed that :- NO circular issued
incorporating replacement of the CDA Rules.
19 February 2010 On the basis of Head Office Fax dated 18/02/2010
Jaipur NIACL Informs.

28. 23 February RTI dicolsure by chief manager Corp HRM, A.

2010 B. Dange:- by oversight CDA Rules 1975
was mentioned in the chargesheet

29. 8 March 2010 RTI reveals that Atul Sahai,chief manager,

NIACL HO directs Jaipur NIACL RO to effect
deductions Rs. 346047/- from the Provident
Fund of the workman.

30. May 2010 NIACL Jaipur ratifies dismissal etc. penalties

against workman, the rules ,again, altered as
 11

NIACL(CDA)Rules 2003
01.12.2010 GIPSA, an association of extremely rich and powerful
elite officials of the 4 PSU companies is successful in
obtaining stay orders to resist transparency and
accountability in Public Life upon an argument that it
is a loose association.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 47

W.P.(C) 8041/2010 GENERAL INSURERS (PUBLIC
SECTOR) ASSOCIATION OF INDIA and ORS .....
Petitioners Through : Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Senior
Advocate with Mr. Dinesh Mathur, Mr. R.S. Mathur,
Mr. Nishant Menon and Ms. Priyanka Bharti,
Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA and ORS .....
Respondents Through : Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Advocate.
CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER
01.12.2010 CM No. 207242 and 20743 of 2010 (for
exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just
exceptions. The applications are disposed of. W.P.(C)
8041/2010 and CM No. 20741/2010 (for Stay)
1. The Petitioner states that since it is simply a loose
association of representatives of Public Sector
General Insurance Companies and not even a
registered body, it has no legal status. In other words,
it cannot sue or be sued. Therefore, it is not a public
authority that can be made amenable to the RTI

IN

S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 14838/2010

GIPSA seeks
Shri Gopal Soni
exemplary cost
from the V/s
workman in the
Chief Executive Officer & Ors.
Rajasthan High
Court APPLICATION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ON BEHALF OF
RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR DELETING THE APPLICANT
 12

RESPONDENT FROM THE ARRAY OF

RESPONDENTS.

4. That the applicant GIPSA is an unnecessary

party in the matter and cannot be impleaded as it is
not a legal entity and does not exercise any authority
over its member companies which are General
Insurance Public Sector Companies and run by the
respective Board of Directors. Further, GIPSA is
only an association of Public Sector General
Insurance Companies and a mechanism to facilitate
deliberations and co-ordinations on matter of
common interest mandated to it from time to time,
without having any administrative or supervisory
authority over them. Hence, the respondent No.1 is
an unnecessary party and has got no role to play in
the instant writ petition. It is further pointed out that
no relief has been sought from the respondent No. 1
in the writ petition, therefore the respondent No.1
becomes an unnecessary party to the litigation.

The respondent No.1 is required to be deleted from

the array of respondents so that it is not required to
unnecessarily contest the matter and go through the
cumbersome procedure of litigation.

The respondent No.1 has been dragged to the

Honble Court for no reason due to lack of
knowledge of the petitioner as it has no role to play
in the relief claimed by the petitioner and it amounts
to unnecessary harassment of the applicant
respondent.

As the petitioner* has impleaded

respondent No.1 as a party to the writ
petition without any basis, exemplary
cost should be imposed on the
petitioner.

(*presently the workman)

 13

GIPSA is successful in various high courts because of

suppression of material facts, e.g. that the Ministry of
Finance,its appointing authority, insists it is the regulator of
the public sector insurance companiesPlease see
Annexure 2 Page No. 26

GI(CDA)Rules Mentioned for initiation of forced

1975 suspension/inquiries against the workman
NIAC(CDA)Rules dismissal etc penalties of November 2011
2003

31. April 2011 Workman visits GIC, Mumbai as RTI

applicant;
meets chairman,NIACL, during interactions,
he assures justice.
32. June 2011 During proceedings of Industrial dispute
with ALC, Ajmer, an order dated 9/06/2011
is communicated , chairman NIACL set aside
the penalties of dismissal and permanent
reduction of six increments against
workman.
Workman insists upon the industrial
dispute,on the following grounds:-
(a). The order totally omits the issue of
pending justice to Hindi Translator,
workmans designation is nowhere
mentioned in the said order.
(b). Un-constitutional alteration in the CDA
Rules,from retrospective effect, in between
the initiation and completion of so called
domestic inquiry is ignored in the order.
 14

(c). Because of the above,and because there

is neither irregularity nor misconduct of
workman,no penalty can be imposed against
workman;the order seeks to penalize the
workman by permanent reduction of two
increments on whimsical grounds.
(d). The order seeks to cause break in
service of the workman,no back wages are
to be paid as per the order, though it
mentions injustice against workman.
(e). The order seeks to transfer the
workman to Ahmedabad though stay orders
in respect of writ petition no. 4575/2007
restricting the NIACL to effect transfer of
workman remains effective as on June 2011
(F). The order sets a bad precedent .
(g). The order states no new points are
raised by workman this raises question
upon intent of NIACL decision makers.
12.10.1999 The Book of Dos and Donts applicable to all
Ethics are decision makers of PSU insurance prohibits
applicable to the :-List of Donts:-DO NOT:-
NIACL decision Be arbitrary or capricious in your
makers decisions,your decisions should be justifiable
and based on sound reasons.
.
30.08.2011 Failure report of conciliation proceedings between
NIACL & Complainant issued by ALC, Ajmer to
Ministry of Labour, Delhi.
..
3.11.2011 Reference Industrial Disputes Act to C.G.I.T. Ajmer
by Union of India for adjudication within time limit of
3 months.
.
 15

1.12.2011 case No. CITR-4/11 titled Shri

Gopal Soni Vs. The New India
Assurance Company Ltd. Statement of claim
before the C.G.I.T. Ajmer,filed in the hope of justice.

33. 1.02.2012 Jt. Secretary,Ministry of Finance ,DFS (Department of

Financial services) directions (ref no. 13014/6/2012-
rajbhasha) to Public Sector banks/insurance
companies:- Para 3 (extract):- You are requested to
form Official Language cadre in your office so that like
other officers those who belong to official language
find opportunites of promotion.Please take action

34. 3.02.2012 No class iii or iv employee transferred beyond 200

Kms, RTI reply of OICL by DGM informs.

35. 22.03.2012 Writ Petition No. 4007/2012 on behalf of chairman

NIACL is registered in Jaipur bench,Rajasthan High
Court. The respondent is Union of India as well as the
workman.

9.04.2012 & Stay orders of Rajasthan High Court secured by

NIACL to challenge the Central Govt; Ministry of
Labours Order of adjudication reference upon the
fallacious argument that they have re-instated the
workman ;
30.07.2012
The workman himself is present as respondent-in-
person ,he hears the argument of NIACL advocate
who ratifies NIACLs written submission that
workman is no longer a dismissed employee.
The judge who granted stay order admits
27.11.2014 possibility of injustice, he says, as per news
published in Rajasthan Patrika that the
judiciary is so overburdened that 300
minutes time is accorded to hear 300 cases.
36. 7.05.2012 NIACL CDA rules in Hindi not available at Jaipur:
informs to comply CIC order 19.04.2012
 16

All rules of a Central Govt office are

mandated to be bilingual as per the official
language rules 1976 (PSUs are deemed
central govt offices).
37. March 2013 A Deputy General Manager,NIACL Head Office files
Cyber Crime Complaint with Mumbai Police seeking
criminal investigation against the workman on behalf
of the Management of NIACL. The officer who filed
complaint to harass the workman stands promoted as
8.08.2013 GM. The law enforcement agency has not taken any
cognizance against workman.
5% face
RTI reply NIACL :-As on date employees
suspension on charge sheeted under the PC (prevention of
corruption corruption) Act-78 out of which 3 have been
placed under suspension.

38. 5.12.2013 NIACL Head office files writ petition impleading the
workman as respondent in the Bombay High Court, to
deny access of information to workman challenging
the orders of CIC. The workman writes a letter to
21.03.2015
appointing authority of chairman,NIACL,the
President of India,the office of President of India write
30.11.2015
a letter to Bombay High Court, forwarding workmans
concerns. Assistant registrar, P. G. Cell replies that the
matter is sub-judice.

Abuse of Public Resources is self-evident as

writ petition is a remedy to a citizen whose
rights are affected by a Govt/PSUs order.
NIACL uses it in the upside down order.

39. 11.04.2014 General Insurance Corporation of India (GIC) replies

to petitioner there is no doctrine of pure
 17

discretion in GIC
13.02.2009 RTI reply of NIACL informs realm of
pure discretion

40. 31.12.2014 Reserve Bank of India takes cognizance of workmans e-

mail:- GIPSA Companies tactics of Writ Petition to protect
the corrupt, abuse of law, forwards to vigilance, IRDA
(Insurance regulatory and development authority of India).

41. 15.01.2015 Ministry of labour takes cognizance of

workmans e-mail,workman files industrial
dispute complaint against GIPSA/NIACL with
your office.

41. 18.03.2015 CBI Press release threeYEARS RIGOROUS IMPRISONMENT

TO DEVELOPMENT OFFICER OF NEW INDIA ASSURANCE IN
CHEATING CASE
http://cbi.nic.in/pressreleases/pr_2015-03-18-1.php

2 July 2015 Aforesaid corrupt one enjoys job security for 40 days
paid Rs. 87713/-and 28296/respectively as public
servant for April & May 2015 at Jaipur NIACL

42 17.07.2015 Competition Commission of India directs Opposite

Parties (4 GIPSA insurers) to cease and desist from
indulging in practices which have been found to be
manipulative; penalty of Rs 251.07 crore on NIACL

42 14.01.2016 An advocate accompanies Mr. Jagdish Chouhan

,divisional manager,NIACL Ajmer during
proceedings of the Industrial dispute.
The ALC allows the advocate despite the
following:-
RTI reply of your office:-There is no provision
16.02.2016 for appearance of advocate on employers
behalf in the Industrial Disputes Act 1947
43 6 January 2017 Hearing by Central Information Commission in
respect of workmans appeal under RTI takes place
 18

,during video conferencing one Arvind

Khandelwal,NIACL, Dy Manager ,Jaipur argues that
appellant is a terminated employee of NIACL and
had filed 100 RTI applications

14 February 2017 Central Information Commission decision 30 January

2017 in respect of workmans RTI application 9.07.2015
the NIACL Jaipur CPIO Surendra Bhatoa writes a
letter to Mrs. Manjula Parasher ,CIC instead of
addressing the same to the information seeker.
As per office record no vigilance enquiries have been
done against Mr. Shrigopal Soni.

In view of the above,the workman seeks transparent justice ; scrapping illegal

deductions ,release of pending financial benefits with interest; ending of the
prolonged hatred /harassment & the consequences.

SHRIGOPAL SONI, (Workman) revribhav@gmail.com

C231,Panchsheel Nagar, Ajmer-305004 https://twitter.com/revribhav

Enclosed:- Annexure(s) written submission of the chairman NIACL that workman is re-instated.

Annexure 1.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JAIPUR BENCH ,JAIPUR.
S.B.Civil Misc Stay Petition No/2012
in
S.B.Civil Writ Petition No4007/2012

1. The New India Assurance Company

Limited,through its Chairman and Managing
Director, 87,M.G.Marg, Fort,
 19

Mumbai 400 001.

2. Divisional Manager, The New India Assurance

Company Limited,(NIACL) Khailand Market,
KotwaliScheme, Ajmer-305001.
...Petitioners
Versus

1. Union of India, Ministry of Labour &

Employment,through its Secretary,
Sharam Shakti Bhawan,Rafi Marg,New Delhi - 110001.

2. Presiding Officer,CGIT-cum-Labour
Court,Distt. & Sessions Court compound ,AJMER-
305001.

3. Assistant Labour Commissioner

(Central),Haribhau Upadhyay Nagar,
Pushkar Road,Ajmer-305001

4. Shri Gopal Soni son of Shri Johril Lal Soni,

resident of C-231,Panchsheel Nagar,Ajmer-305004.
Respondents.

S.B. Civil Misc.Stay Application under Article

 20

226 & 227 of the constitution of India.

To,
The Honble Chief Justice and his
other companion Judges of the
High Court of Judicature at Jaipur Branch,
Jaipur.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIP:

The humble petitioners abovenamed most

respectfully beg to submit the present writ
petition as under:-

1. That the petitioners are filing the present

writ petition before this Hon"ble Court wherein
they have full hope of success. That the
pettioners have got a strong prima facie case
in their favour.

2. That the facts and grounds of the writ

petition may kindly be treated as part and
parcel of this stay application to avoid
unncessary repetition.

3. That the impugned order dated 3.11.2011

whereby the reference has been made by the
respondent No.1 under Section 2(A) of the ID
 21

Act,1947 to the CGIT-cum-LC for adjudication

suffers from error apparent of law as well as
gross violations of provisions of the ID
Act,1947. The reference in regard to
termination order dated 16.11.2009 is not
tenable because the petitioners vide order
dated 9.06.2011 had reinstated the respondent
no.4 in service and once the workman was
reinstated the case was no more that of
termination/dismissal. Thus, the reference is
in gross violation of Section 10 as well as
Section 2(A) and 2(K) of the ID Act,1947,
therefore, in case the operation of the impugned
order dated 3.11.2011 as well as the further
proceedings pending before the CGIT-cum- Labour
Court, Ajmer are not stayed then the petitioners
will suffer huge irreparable loss and injury
which cannot be compensated in any terms.

4. That the balance of convenience also

lies in favour of petitioners.

It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the stay

application may kindly be allowed and execution
and operation of order dated 3.11.2011 whereby
reference has been made by the Ministry of
Labour & Employment, Government of India, New
 22

Delhi to be adjudicated by the CGIT-cum-Labour

Court,Ajmer as well as the further proceedings
pending before the learned Central Government
Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Ajmer in
reference case No. CITR-4/11 titled Shri Gopal
Soni Vs. The New India Assurance Company Ltd.
May kindly be stayed during the pendency of the
writ petition.
Or any other appropriate interim
order or direction may kindly be passed in
favour of the petitioners which this Hon"ble
Court may deem fit and peoper in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
Your Lordships,

humble Petitioners
Through their councel,
(V.S. Yadav)
Advocate


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE
FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
,JAIPUR.

S.B. Civil writ petition No.4007/2012

Date of Order: : 9.4.2012

Honble MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI

Mr. V. S. Yadav for petitioners

 23

Issue notice to respondents Nos. 1 and 4 only

as other respondents are formal party,by making
it returnable within six weeks.
In the meantime,operation of the impugned order
referring to labour court shall remain stayed.
Stay will come in effect only after service of
notice on respondent No.1 and 4.

(M.N. BHANDARI),J

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JAIPUR BENCH ,JAIPUR.
S. B. Civil Writ Petition No4007/2012

The New India Assurance Company Limited & Anr.

VERSUS
UOI & Others
Honble MR. JUSTICE M.N. BHANDARI

Mr. V. S. Yadav-- for petitioners

Mr. Shashank Sharmafor respondents No. 1 and 3

Respondent No. 4 in person

BY THE COURT:
 24

Heard on the application moved under Article

226(3) of the constitution of India by the respondent
No.4 for vacation of the interim order dated 9.4.2012.

Respondent No.4,present in person, submits that interim

order passed by this court may be vacated. The dispute
has already been taken up for adjudication by the
Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT). No
ground is made out even to challenge the reference made
by the Ministry of Labour.

Learned counsel for petitioners, on the other

hand, submits that reference of dispute is not even
competent. It is submitted that before approaching
conciliation officer, petitioners preferred a review
petition followed by memorial against the order of
dismissal. They were pending consideration before the
competent authority and memorial submitted by the
petitioner was accepted vide order dated 9.6.2011,
whereby, order of dismissal was recalled by inflicting
lesser penalty. The failure report was yet given by
conciliation officer on 2.9.2011 when dismissal was not
existing in view of acceptance of memorial, thus
dispute pertaining to dismissal referred at point No.1
of the reference does not exist. It is further stated
that once dismissal goes, other issues regarding
transfer and fixation of wages cannot be raised by the
individual but it can be raised through the union or
majority of the workmen as section-2A of the Industrial
Disputes Act,1947 does not apply in such matters, thus
reference of the dispute becomes incompetent, hence,
stayed by this court.

Respondent No.4 submits that petitioners have no

intention to reinstate him. While accepting memorial,
he is shown Assistant therein, whereas, said post was
not held by respondent No.4 as he was Hindi Translator.
Since wrong designation was given while accepting the
memorial, there was no occasion for him to join the
 25

post. The intention of the petitioners was not to

reinstate him, otherwise his correct designation would
have been given while accepting the memorial.

Accordingly, Union of India has rightly referred

the dispute before the labour court.
I have considered submissions of the parties and
perused the record.

It is not is dispute that before finanlisation of

memorial, respondent No.4 raised dispute before the
conciliation officer and memorial was accepted before
the failure report. The order of dismissal was
substituted with lesser punishment thus it was not
existing at the time of failure report and, at the time
of reference. The respondent No.4 has disputed his
designation mentioned in the memorial but merely
mentioning even wrong designation does not take away
the effect of decision on the memorial where punishment
of dismissal was substituted with lesser punishment.
Accordingly, first issue of reference is not legally
tenable in absence of existence of the order of
dismissal.
Once the first issue of reference goes, two
issues of reference at item No.2 and 3 cannot be raised
through union or majority of the employees as section
2-A of the Act of 1947 allows dispute by an individual
only in the matter of discharge and dismissal which is
not the case herein as order of dismissal has already
been substituted with lesser punishment.
For the reasons given aforesaid, I do not find any
ground to vacate the interim order. Hence, application
filed under Article 226(3) of the constitution of India
is dismissed.
The writ petition may now be listed for admission
and disposal after ten days.

(M.N. BHANDARI),J
 26

Annexure 2 ShriGopal Soni

To be issued in Hindi RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT Most Immediate

F. NO.-RTI-11018/02/2009/Ins.II
Government of India Ministry of Finance
Department of Financial Services
_____ Jeevan Vihar Building,3rd Floor,
. Parliament Street, New Delhi- 100001.

Dated: 25.08.2009

To,

The Chief Executive

G.I.P.S.A. Jeevan Vihar Building 3rd Floor,Parliament Street, New Delhi- 10001.

Sub: Application received under Right to Information Act 2005 from Sh. Gopal Soni. Ajmer

Sir,

Please find enclosed herewith a letter No. 12019/52/2009/R.B. dated

20.08.2009,alongwith complaint dated 31.07.2009,in orginal,received by this Section on
25.08.2009 from the Department of Official Language, Ministry of Home affairs, New Delhi
regarding the captioned subject.

Sh. Gopal Soni has desired any order or notice relating to service matters (including
disciplinary proceedings) required to be served on him to be in Hindi. Or as the case may be, in
English, it shall be given to him in that language without undue delay under the RTI Act.

Being regulator of the public sector insurance companies, GIPSA is requested to

examine the issue raised in the enclosed application and furnish a suitable reply to Sh. Gopal
Soni under intimation to this Department. Hence, application is being transferred as per Section
2(h) of Right to Information Act,2005 to GIPSA.

Yours faithfully,

(S. Gopal Krishna)

. CA PIO
. Tel No. 011-23748736Encl: as stated above
CC: Sh. Gopal Soni,C231, Panchsheel Nagar,Ajmer-305001 For information. You are requested
to pursue this matter directly with GIPSA.
 27

F. NO.-RTI-11018/01/2009/Ins.II
Government of India Ministry of Finance
Department of Financial Services
_____

Jeevan Vihar Building,3rd Floor,

. Parliament Street, New Delhi- 100001.

Dated: 20.08.2009

To,

The Chief Executive

G.I.P.S.A. Jeevan Vihar Building 3rd Floor,Parliament Street, New Delhi- 10001.

Sub: Application received under Right to Information Act 2005 from Sh. Gopal Soni. Ajmer

Sir,

Please find enclosed herewith a letter No. 12019/52/209/R.B. received by this section on
18.08.2009, in original,from the Department of Official Language, Ministry of Home affairs,
New Delhi regarding the captioned subject.

Sh. Gopal Soni has desired to know the correct and certified information regarding the
implementation of rules and sub-rules of the insurance companies for the sake of public interest
under the RTI Act.

Being regulator of the public sector insurance companies, GIPSA is requested to

examine the issue raised in the enclosed application and furnish a suitable reply to Sh. Gopal
Soni under intimation to this Department. Hence, application is being transferred as per Section
2(h) of Right to Information Act,2005 to GIPSA.

Yours faithfully,

(S. Gopal Krishna)

. CA PIO
. Tel No. 011-23748736

Encl: as stated above

CC: Sh. Gopal Soni,C231, Panchsheel Nagar,Ajmer-305001 For information. You are
requested to pursue this matter directly with GIPSA.
28 Annexure -3 Shri Gopal Soni
 29

http://courtnic.nic.in/rajasthan/kquarylobiscaseno.asp?id=get
Enquiry By Case Number

Case Type Registration No. Year:

DISPOSED [ DISMISSED ]

Date of query : 19/12/2011 Time : 3:28:02 PM

CW'4575' of 2007 - R 5636/2007
Petitioner : SHRI GOPAL SONI
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
Respondent:
COMPANY L
Petitioner Advocate: RAJENDRA SONI
Respondent Advocate: V S YADAV
Class Code : 0505 Registered on : 28/6/2007
Bench : SB Disposal Date : 21/10/2011
Court NO. : 8
Remark : Challan No: /
Department Details
Dept Type Dept Code Dept Name
C 44 Insurance (Except SI)
Paper Details
Date of
No. Type
filing
9394/2008 REPLY 10/3/2008
Court
SHRI GOPAL SONI VS NEW INDIA Fee : 0
ASSURANCE COMPANY L Proc. Fee
:

9395/2008 APPLICATION 10/3/2008

Court
SHRI GOPAL SONI VS NEW INDIA Fee : 0
ASSURANCE COMPANY L Proc. Fee
:

25096/2007 POWER 22/8/2007

Court
SHRI GOPAL SONI VS NEW INDIA Fee : 2
ASSURANCE COMPANY L Proc. Fee
:

22030/2007 PF+NOTICE+EXTRA 1/8/2007

Court
SHRI GOPAL SONI VS NEW INDIA Fee : 5
ASSURANCE COMPANY L Proc. Fee
:
 30

In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench Jaipur

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4575/2007

(Shri Gopal Soni Vs. New India Assurance Co Ltd. & Anr.)

Date of Order:: 21st October,2011

Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.N. Bhandari

Mr. Imran Khan, for the petitioner

Mr. V.S. Yadav ,for the respondent

By the court:

Learned councel for the respondents submits that petition filed against the order
of transfer has become infructuous as subsequent to the order of transfer,order
of dismissal was passed and the same was maintained in appeal.

However, on memorial, punishment was reduced but the petitioner has not
joined the services. Looking to all these facts, no significance is now attached to
the order of transfer so as to press this writ petition.

So far as the prayer for promotion is concerned,candidature of the petitioner was

considered in the year 2003 and 2006 but therein he was not found suitable by
the respondents,accordingly,promotion could not be extended to.

Learned councel for the petitioner submits that so far as order of transfer is
concerned,it has lost significance in view of the subsequent development.
However,if the petitioner joins the services,it may be kept open for him to take up
the matter for denial of promotion if so desired.

I have considered the submissions made by learned councel for the parties.

So far as the issue of promotion is concerned,same has separately been

challenged by maintaining another writ petition. Looking to the aforesaid,now the
writ petition for challenging to the order of transfer becomes infructuous in view
of the subsequent development indicated above. Hence,the writ petition for the
purpose is dismissed.

So far as the question of promotion is concerned,it would be decided by

this court in writ petition separately preferred and is pending for consideration
before this court.

(M.N.Bhandari),J.
 31

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BRANCH JAIPUR.

S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION NO. --------/2008

IN

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4575/2007

Shri Gopal Soni son of Shri Johari Lal Ji Soni, aged about 41 years,by caste Soni, resident of C-231,
Panchsheel Nagar,Ajmer.

Petiotioner.

V/s.

1. The New India Assurance Company Ltd., through its Regional Manager, 2nd Floor, South Block,
Nehru Place, Tonk Road, Jaipur.

2. Chairman & Managing Director, The New India Assurance Company Limited, Head Office, 87, M. G.
Road, Fort, Mumbai- 400001.
Respondents

APPLICATION UNDER ARTICLE 226 (3) OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR VACATION OF THE EX- PARTE

INTERIM ORDER DATED 30.7.2006,PASSED BY THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. ASOPA WHEREBY THE OPERATION OF

THE ORDER DATED 5.6.2007 WAS STAYED.

THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE

Shri Naryayan Roy and his other companion judges of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Branch,

Jaipur.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS:

The humble answering respondents,most respectfully beg to submit the present application, as under:-

1. That the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging

the transfer order dated 5.06.2007 whereby he was transferred

from Ajmer to Gulabpura which is not beyond 150 Kms from the

present place of posting as provided in the transfer policy and the

transfer of the petitioner was made on account of administrative exigencies of

the company and it is the right to the employer to transfer an employee and

on the other hand no employee can claim to remain at the place of his choice

and for an unending period. The petitioner has also made false averments

that he was transferred on a lower post is also contrary to the facts of the

case as the post of Hindi Assistant and the Hindi Translators in the past have

been given promotion on the post of Senior Assistants and the case of the

petitioner was also considered for promotion in the year 2003 as well as in the
 32

year 2006 and he was not found suitable which he has concealed in the writ

petition and on the other hand made averments that the persons junior to him

such as Ram Babu Gupta given promotion on the post of Senior Assistant

whereas the petitioner was not given promotion.

2.

3. .

Your Lordships,

Humble respondents,

Through its Counsel,

(V. S. Yadav) Advocate.

33 Annexure 4: Employee must be asked why specific penalty should not be award
 34

Annexure 5: Copy of order Dt. 5.11.2009

(violating the Industrial Disputes Act by changing the service conditions without prescribed
notice:)

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Regional Office: 330000
Nehru Place,Tonk Road,Jaipur-302015.
Tel.
Fax.

Office Order
Mr.Shri Gopal Soni(under suspension) S. R. No. 24001 while working as Assistant (translator) at
Ajmer D.O. committed certain misconducts/irregularity during the year 2008,in terms of The
New India Assurance Co.(Conduct,Discipline & Appeals) Rules,2003,as amended upto date and
Memorandum dated 02.05.2008 conveying Article of Charges framed against Mr.Shri Gopal
Soni was issued.

Mr.Soni did not submit any reply to the Memorandum dated 02.05.2008 and hence a domestic
inquiry was instituted by appointing Shri A.K.Samaria, Branch Manager and Shri Pravesh
Nigam,Admn.Officer as Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer respectively.

Mr.Shri Gopal Soni did not appear for the enquiry proceedings inspite of various letters
dt.23.07.2008, 28.11.2008 and 4.05.2009 informing about the adjourned dates of hearings of the
enquiry but he did not present himself on the adjourned dates of hearing. Shri A.K.Samaria after
conclusion of ex-parte inquiry proceedings,submitted his Enquiry report dated 08.06.2009 with
the findings that all the charges were found to be proved.

A copy of the said Enquiry report dtd. 08.06.2009 was provided to Mr. Shri Gopal Soni vide
letter dated 19.06.2009 to enable him submit his representation,if any,against the findings of
Inquiry Officers report.

Mr.Shri Gopal Soni,vide his letters dated 27.06.2009 & 14.07.2009 desired certain
documents/queries instead of submitting his representation against the findings of Inquiry
Authority,which were provided to him vide letters dtd. 03.07.2009 & 13.08.2009.

I have carefully gone through the Charge -sheet, Report submitted by the Enquiry Officer, record
of proceedings, papers/letters related to Enquiry and correspondence made with Mr.Shri Gopal
Soni in connection with the Enquiry and I am in agreement with the findings of the Enquiry
Officers report that all the charges framed against him stand proved.

I find that Shri Soni is in the habit of disobeying the lawful orders of the superiors. Mr.Soni
had refused to accept Memorandum dtd.13.02.2008 issued to him even though he was present in
the office. During office hours he used to take photographs of various official documents /papers
from his mobile phone. He also caused hindrance in the smooth functioning of the office. Thus,
Mr.Shri Gopal Soni has acted in the manner,which is unbecoming of a Public Servant.

Thus,the misconducts/irregularities committed by Mr.Shri Gopal Soni are grave and serious in
nature and,therefore,I impose upon Mr.Shri Gopal Soni the Major penalty of reduction of his
present Basic Salary by SIX STAGES in his time scale permanently with immediate effect as
provided under Rule No.23 (e) of the New India Assurance Co. (Conduct,Discipline & Appeals)
Rules,2003,as amended from time to time.

Mr.Shri Gopal Soni who was placed under suspension vide Office Order dated 10.04.2008 will
continue to remain under suspension till the final decision in the Memeorandum dtd.13.02.2008
served upon Mr. Soni is taken.

Mr.Shri Gopal Soni be informed accordingly.

Receipt of this Order be acknowledged by Mr.Shri Gopal Soni.

Place:Jaipur (S.K.Kundra)
Date:05.11.2009 Manager Disciplinary Authority
 35

Annexure 6 : Dismissal order dt.16.11.2009

(violating the Industrial Disputes Act by changing the service conditions ):

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Regional Office: 330000
Nehru Place,Tonk Road,Jaipur-302015.
Tel. Fax.

Mr.Shri Gopal Soni(under suspension) S. R. No. 24001 while working as Assistant (translator)
at Ajmer D.O. committed certain misconducts/irregularity during the year 2007,in terms of The
New India Assurance Co.(Conduct,Discipline & Appeals) Rules,2003,as amended up to date and
Memorandum dated 13. 02.2008 conveying Article of Charges framed against Mr.Shri Gopal
Soni was issued.

Mr.Soni has denied all the charges vide his letter dated 07.03.2008 and hence a domestic inquiry
was instituted by appointing Shri A.K.Samaria, Branch Manager and Shri Pravesh
Nigam,Admn.Officer as Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer respectively.Shri A.K.Samaria
after conclusion of inquiry proceedings,submitted his Enquiry report dated 06.03.2009 with the
findings that all the charges were found to be proved.

A copy of the said Enquiry report dtd. 06.03.2009 was provided to Mr. Shri Gopal Soni vide
letter dated 22.04.2009 to enable him to submit his representation,if any,against the findings of
Inquiry Officers report.

Mr.Shri Gopal Soni,vide his letters dated 25.04.2009 & 26.05.2009 desired certain
documents/queries instead of submitting his representation against the findings of Inquiry
Authority,which were provided to him vide letters dtd. 13.05.2009 & 22.07.2009.

I have carefully gone through the Charge -sheet, Report submitted by the Enquiry Officer, record
of proceedings, papers/letters related to Enquiry and correspondence made with Mr.Shri Gopal
Soni in connection with the Enquiry and I am in agreement with the findings of the Enquiry
Officers report that all the charges framed against him stand proved.

I find that Mr. Soni remained absent from office for period 26.06.2007 to 31.07.2007 and left
the headquarter Without getting prior approval of the competent authority. Mr. Soni had
disobeyed the instructions issued to him vide various letters dt.
25.06.2007,28.06.2007,4.07.2007,06.07.2007 & 25.07.2007 to join the duty. Mr. Soni had also
temepred with the medical certficate dtd. 25.06.2007 which was issued by Dr. Mukesh Mathur.
Thus, Mr.Shri Gopal Soni has acted in the manner, which is unbecoming of a Public Servant.

Thus,the misconducts/irregularities committed by Mr.Shri Gopal Soni are grave and serious in
nature and,therefore,I impose upon Mr.Shri Gopal Soni the Major penalty of Dismissal from
the services of the company with immediate effect as provided under Rule No.23 (i) of the New
India Assurance Co. (Conduct,Discipline & Appeals) Rules,2003,as amended from time to time.

Mr.Shri Gopal Soni who was placed under suspension vide Office Order dated 10.04.2008 and
his suspension period is justified and hereby confirmed.

Mr.Shri Gopal Soni be informed accordingly.

Receipt of this Order be acknowledged by Mr.Shri Gopal Soni.

Place:Jaipur
Date: 16.11.2009 (S.K.Kundra) .
Manager Disicplinary Authority
 36

Annexure 7
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd,Mumbai (H.O.)
ORDER
I have before me Memorial dated 25.05.2010 submitted by Mr.
Shrigopal Soni,S.R. No. 24001, Assistant ***(now dismissed),Ajmer
DO under Jaipur RO against two Orders dated 10.5.2010 and 17.5.2010
passed by the appellate authority*** in two separate disciplinary
proceedings initiated against Mr. Shrigopal Soni. I find that Mr. Soni has
submitted a single Memorial against two Penalty Orders issued to him.
The said memorial is preferred in terms of the Rule 40 of the New India
Assurance Co. Ltd. ( Conduct,Discipline & Appeal ) Rules,2003 as
amended.
On scrutiny of the all the relevant documents pertaining to both the
disciplinary actions against Mr. Soni,I observe as under:
Case I Charge Sheet dated 13.2.2008 Unauthorised absence
Mr. Shrigopal Soni,while working as Assistant (Translator ) at Ajmer
DO 331400 under Jaipur RO during the year 2007,committed certain
acts of commission and omission amounting to misconduct in terms of
the CDA Rules. Mr. Soni was issued Memorandum dated 13.02.2008 for
the following irregularities:
1. Shrigopal Soni did not attend office on 26.6.2007
whereas casusal leave was granted by the Competent Authority
from 21.6.2007 to 25.6.2007 to him. Thus Shri Gopal Soni
absented himself from 26.6.2007 to 31.7.2007 without prior
permission from Competent Authority.
2. Mr. Shrigopal Soni did not obey and flouted directions under the
rules of superior officers deliberately with malafide intentions and
ulterior motive which were communicated to him to report on
duty through many letters dated 25.6.2007,28.06.2007, 4.7.2007,
6.7.2007 and 25.7.2007.
3. The conduct of Mr. Shrigopal Soni absenting himself from office
with malafide intention and ulterior motive leaving the Head
Quarters without prior permission from the Competent Authority
is violative of the Company rules and the act is clear example of
defiance.
4. Mr. Shrigopal Soni with mjalfide intention and ulterior motive
following his personal interest tampered with the Sickeness
Certificate dated 25.6.2007 issued by Dr. Mukesh Mathur,
Meawara Mansion,Subzi Mandi,Kekri and;submitted in the office.

Mr. Shrigopal Soni submitted his reply vide letter dated

7.3.2008 denying all the charges leveled against him.
 37

Thereupon,the Disciplinary Authority directed to initiate inquiry

against Mr. Shriopal Soni. Mr. A. K. Samaria, Branch Manager was
appointed as Inquiry Officer, for this purpose.
(page2)
The Inquiry Officer,after completion of Inquiry,submitted his
Report dated 06.03.2009 with the findings that all the charges
leveled against Mr. Soni are proved.
Mr. Shrigopal Soni was furnished with a copy of the Inquiry
Officers Report dated 06.03.2009 vide letter dated 22.04.2009 to
enable him to make his representation,if any,on the findings of
the Inquiry Officer. Mr. Soni, instead of submitting his
representation,vide his letters dated 25.4.2009 and 26.5.2009
sought for certain documents/queries which were provided to
him vide letters dated 13.5.2009 and 22.7.2009.
The Disciplinary Authority on going through all the relevant
documents of the case, imposed upon Mr. Shrigopal Soni the
penalty of Dismissal vide Order dated 16.11.2009 in terms of
the Rule No. 23 (i) of the CDA Rules.
Being aggrieved by the said Order of the Disciplinary
Authority, Mr. Shrigopal Soni preferred appeal dated 1.12.2009
which was rejected by the Appellate Authority vide Order dated
17.05.2010
The said Memorial is submitted by Mr. Soni against the Order
of the Appellate Authority.

Case II - Charge Sheet dated 2.5.2008 (Tampering of documents)

Mr. Shrigopal Soni was placed under suspension vide order

dated 10.4.2008 since disciplinary proceedings were
contemplated against him.
Mr. Soni while working as Assistant (translator) at Ajmer DO
committed certain misconducts during the year 2008, in terms of
the CDA Rules and accordingly, he was issued Memorandum
dated 2.5.2008 conveying following Article of charges framed
against him was issued.
1. It is alleged that Mr. Soni ignored the legal orders/instructions
of his superior officers and did not comply them deliberately
and malfidely and with ulterior motive.
 38

2. It is alleged that Mr. Soni malafidely and with ulterior motive

tampered with important documents of office during office
time in the office premises. Further it is alleged that Mr. Soni
took photos from his mobile phone of important documents
and other records of office.
3. It is alleged that various conducts of Mr. Soni malafidely and
with ulterior motive for his selfish interests presents evil/bad
example before other workers of the organisation, which is not
expected from a public servant.

Mr. Soni did not submit any reply to the memorandum ***
and hence, a domestic inquiry was instituted against him by
appointing Mr. A. K. Samaria, Branch Manager as Inquiry
Officer to look into the charges leveled against Mr. Soni.
(page 3)
Mr. Shrigopal Soni did not attend inquiry proceedings
inspite of giving him sufficient opportunities and therefore, the
inquiry officer concluded the inquiry as Ex- parte and
submitted his report dated 8.6.2009 with the findings that all
the charges were found to be proved.
A copy of the said inquiry report was furnished to
Mr. Soni vide letter dated 19.6.2009 to enable him to make his
representation against the findings of the inquiry officer. In
response, Mr. Soni submitted his letters dated 27.6.2009 and
14.7.2009 demanding certain documents/queries instead of
submitting his representation as called for. However, he was
provided with the documents vide letter dated 3.7.2009 and
13.8.2009.
The Disciplinary Authority on due consideration of the
case concurred with the findings of the Inquiry Officer and
observed that Mr. Soni used to take photographs of various
official documents from his mobile phone and caused
hindrance in the smooth functioning of the office and thus Mr.
Soni acted in the manner unbecoming of the public servant.
The disciplinary authority also found that Mr. Soni is in the
habit of disobeying lawful orders of the superiors and he had
refused to accept Charge Sheet dated 13.2.2008 issued to him.
Looking to the gravity of the misconduct proved,the
 39

Disciplinary Authority imposed upon Mr. Soni the penalty of

reduction in the basic salary by six (6) stages with immediate
effect in terms of the new India Assurance ( Conduct,Discipline
and Appeal ) Rules 2003 as amended vide order dated
5.11.2009.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Disciplinary
Authority, Mr. Soni had submitted his Appeal dated
1.12.2009,which was rejected by the Appellate Authority vide
order dated 10.5.2010.
The present Memorial is submitted against the aforesaid
order of the Appellate Authority.
I have carefully examined the submissions made out by Mr.
Shrigopal Soni vis -a- vis entire records of the case in the both
the disciplinary cases initiated against Mr. Soni. I am satisfied
that the inquiries were held as per Rules and Mr. Soni was
given adequate opportunities to defend himself following
Principles of Natural Justice.
On going through the Memorial, I observe that Mr. Soni has
more or less raised same contentions which were raised in the
his Appeals and earlier representations and the same have
aleready been considered by Disciplinary Authority and
Appellate Authority respectively before passing the Orders. No
new points are raised by him. The Appellate Authority had
given detailed reasoning on the contentions of Mr. Soni. In the
Memorial , Mr. Soni is alleging about non-supply of the
Memorandum in the language he desired i.e. in English. I
further find that Mr. Soni demanded the English translated
copy after the inquiry commenced. He could have asked for the
same before sending reply to the charge sheet.
On examination of the documents in respect of Case No. 1, I
observe that Mr. Shrigopal Soni has sent a fax to Ajmer on
25.7.2007 and on the said fax the
(Page 4) medical certificate of Dr. Mathur was pasted. Dr.
Mathur has given his written statement on 26.8.2007 that he
had treated Mr. Soni for abdomen pain and kindney stone on
the basis of symptoms and advised rest for the periods from
25.6.2007 to 15.7.2007 and from 16.7.2007 to 30.7.2007. On
30.7.2007 when Mr. Soni again visited him he found that he
 40

was fit to resume duties. Dr. Mathur has confirmed that he

had not written the Degree and Registration number by his
hand in the original certificate. Dr. Mathur has confirmed that
the certificate issued by him was tampered by pasting on his
letter and inserting his degree and registration number.
Therefore,it is ascertained that Dr. Mathur has treated Mr.
Shrigopal Soni and issued medical certificate. No tampering in
the material facts of the certificate is observed.
Further,as regards Case No. II, I observe that Mr. Soni did
not attend the inquiry proceedings and hence,inquiry was held
ex-parte. He should have participated the inquiry proceedings
with his defence documents and defence witnesses to disprove
the charge,which he had not done.
As regards penalties imposed on Mr. Shrigopal Soni, I am of
the considered view that looking to the gravity of the offences
on part of Mr. Soni in both the cases as mentioned above,the
penalties of Dismissal and reduction in basic salary by six
increments respectively,to be disproportionate and much on
the higher side and needs consideration of the same.
Hence, on consideration of all the facts and circumstances of
the case as also to meet the ends of justice, I admit the
Memorial dated 25.5.2010 submitted by Mr. Shrigopal Soni and
I hereby set aside the Orders dated 5.11.2009 and 16.11.2009
passed by the Appellate Authorities upholding the orders of
the Disciplinary Authorities and impose upon Mr. Shrigopal
Soni the modified penalty as applicable in both the Charge
Sheets issued to Mr. Soni to that of reduction in basic salary
by two stages in the time scale as applicable as on the date of
first penalty order i.e. on 5.11.2009..
I also direct that the intervening period i.e. from the date of
dismissal till Mr. Soni reports for duty,shall be treated as period
not spent on duty and hence,on Loss of Pay and he will not be
entitled for any back wages.
Further, I hereby order that Mr. Soni be transferred to
Ahmedabad RO. Mr. Shrigopal Soni be informed accordingly.
(M.RAMDOSS)
CHAIRMAN-CUM MANAGING DIRECTOR
DATED-9TH June 2011
Annexure-8 Transfer Order to Ahmedabad
41

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd,Regional Office:330000

Nehru Place,Tonk Road,Jaipur-302015
Tel:2743367,2743368,2742147,2743507,2742291 FAX:0141-2743405

By Speedpost/UPC

Dt. 22.06.2011

Mr. Shri Gopal Soni

Hindi Translator
C-231,Panchsheel Nagar,
Ajmer-305004.

Dear Sir,

Re: Your transfer in pursuance of Order dtd. 09.06.2011 issued by our

Chairman-cum-Managing Director.

This is in reference to the Order dtd. 09.06.2011 issued by our

Chairman-cum-Managing Director in reference to Memorial dtd.
25.05.2011 submitted by you.
As directed by our Chairman-cum-Managing Director in his
Order dtd. 09.06.2011,you are hereby transferred to Ahmedabad
Regional Office with immediate effect.
You are advised to report to Chief Regional Manager,Ahmedabad
R.O. at the following address:
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Regional Office,5th Floor,Popular House
Opp. Swastik Market,Ashram Road,AHMEDABAD- 380009.
Thanking you.

Yours faithfully,
(S.S.Hira)
Chief Regional Manager
encl:a/a
 42

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

regional office.330000, ii floor,Nehru Place,Tonk Road,Jaipur-
302015.Tel.:01412745701-775
23rd December 2011 'Registered A/D"

Mr. Shri Gopal Soni,

C-231]Panchsheel Nagar,Ajmer-305004.
Dear Sir,

Re: Non compliance of Order dated 09.06.2011 issued by Chairman-

cum-Managing Director and letter dated 22.06.2011 issued by the
undersigned

This is in furtherance to our letter dated 21.10.2011,drwaing

your attention towards order dated 9.06.2011 issued by our
Chairman-cum-Managing Director with regard to your memorial
dated 25.05.2010 and our letter dated 22.06.2011 conveying the
decision to join duties at Ahmedabad R.O. with immediate effect.
Thereafter ,we also advised you vide our letter dated 21.10.2011
to report for duties at Ahmedabad R.O. within a period of 15
days from the date of receipt of this letter,failure of which
would be construed that you were not interested to join the
duties.

It has been reported that till date you have not reported for
duties at Ahmedabad R.O.. As such,we once again offer you the
last opportunity to report for duties within 7 days of receipt
of this letter,otherewise the decision taken by the authority
vide order dated 09.06.2011 and our letter dated 22.06.2011
conveying you report for duties will stand withdrwn. The matter
will not ben reviewed further,which please note.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,

(S.S. Hira)
Chief Regional Manager
Annexure- 9 43