Service matters of Government employees and member of trade union act, 1926
9 months ago
I am an central government employee have been elected as office bearer(General Secretary) of the Union which is registered under Trade Union Act, 1926 have been actively questioning the administration, officers to address the pending issues of the employees.
For questioning corruption and pursuing the case of Sexual harassment at workplace filed by an woman employees against one of the officer, the same officer has personally targetted, suspended me by reopening the past complaints, allegations made against me and the issues which were closed (of 13 years ago etc.), as a part of his personal targetting and the memos which were issued for actively participating in union strikes etc.
In this regard, from union we have submitted numerous complaints to the competent authority against the officer for threatening, blackmailing us for pursuing his case, later he found guilty by the CASH committee, but no action was taken against him.
But the competent authority supporting the accused by allowing the officer to take his personal revenge against me by violating the rules, as he was made incharge of my service file.
The officer threatened and blackmailed us that he will make us pay, as he was posted in important section by making him incharge of service files of the employees by violating the rules.
Taking advantage of it, he misusing his official powers in targetting me, which is against rules, as he was not supposed to be posted in such important places as per CCS rules.
In view of the above, is it not against the rules, even i being an office bearer of trade union act 1926, for issuing memo and suspending me by treating me as a normal employee for actively participating in union activities.
The officer who supposed to face punishment was allowed to take his personal revenge by allowing him to misuse his personal position of he being incharge of my personal file by issuing me memos and suspend me, in which competent authority also supporting him by violating the rules.
I have all the document proof of above stated facts.
I need advice how should I further proceed in this case legally.
As per trade union act 1926, section 17, 18, will I get protection and get out of it.
Can I make that person pay the price for the above things legally individually or suing him through our union?
As per Section 33 (4) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the number of workmen to be recognized as protected workmen shall be one percent of the total number of workmen employed therein subject to a minimum number of five protected workmen and a maximum number of one hundred protected workmen. Section 33 (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, provides that during the pendency of any conciliation procedure before a conciliation officer or a Board or of any proceeding before an arbitrator or a Labour Court or Tribunal or National Tribunal in respect of an industrial dispute, the employer should not initiate any action against any protected workman concerned in such dispute- (a) by altering, to the prejudice of such protected workman, the conditions of service applicable to him immediately before the commencement of such proceedings; or ( b) by discharging or punishing, whether by dismissal or otherwise, such protected workman, save with the express permission in writing of the authority before which the proceeding is pending. If any employer wants to take action against a protected workman during the pendency of a conciliation proceeding, before the Conciliation Officer, Board, Arbitrators, Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, he should get express permission from the conciliation Officer, Labour Court or Tribunal, as the case may be, by applying in form J. However, management is entitled to decline recognition as a protected workman to a person nominated by the union, if any disciplinary proceeding is pending against such workman. Union certainly cannot exercise their power under Rule 61(1) to give immunity to an employee against whom disciplinary proceedings initiated by the management are pending, by nominating his name for recognition as protected workman.” Therefore, an office bearer of the Union facing disciplinary proceedings is not entitled to be nominated by the Union for recognition as a protected workman and the management is absolutely within their powers to decline recognition to such an office-bearer under sub-rule (2) of Rule 61. In such cases the management should inform its intention to decline the name of a particular worker in the list, within 15 days, failing which it can be presumed that the management has no objection in the proposal furnished by the union. In the prevailing situation, reach out to an Advocate for guidance and steps
Please file a complaint before the labour court stating your grievance. Please consult a good lawyer for the same
Less Full and final settlement
Already Served 10 Days Out Of 15 Days Notice Period, But Have Still Not Got LWD.
Regarding obc NCL reservation
Contractual Employer deducting PF
Pf overlapped and now jobless
