by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Apr 5, 2025 | Blog, Service Matters
In the context of Service Law in India, the “Efficiency Bar” serves as a critical performance evaluation checkpoint for government employees. This mechanism is designed to assess an employee’s competence before allowing them to advance to higher pay scales within their existing grade. Primarily applicable to government servants under the Central Civil Services (CCS) Rules and similar state regulations, it’s frequently encountered in time-bound promotions or automatic pay progression schemes. The core objective of the Efficiency Bar is to uphold meritocracy and prevent automatic promotions for underperforming individuals, thereby maintaining efficiency in public administration.
If an employee is deemed inefficient, they can be stopped at the Efficiency Bar, resulting in the denial of further increments until their performance improves. This process ensures that only deserving employees are rewarded. The consequences of being stopped at the bar include the withholding of increments, a chance for improvement, and potentially, disciplinary action like compulsory retirement for prolonged inefficiency. Indian courts have validated the Efficiency Bar as a necessary administrative tool, emphasizing that decisions to stop an employee must be fair, reasoned, and based on objective assessments.
It’s important to distinguish the Efficiency Bar from probation; while probation is an initial assessment for new recruits, this bar applies to confirmed employees at later career stages. In essence, it functions as a performance-linked control mechanism, promoting accountability and discouraging complacency within government services.
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Apr 5, 2025 | Service Matters
Second ACP is not granted because an enquiry is pending. That has been pending for the last five years. I am posted in the irrigation department. A false complaint was filed by the contractor that I demanded money from him for clearing his bills. Upon his complaint an enquiry was set up by the department. In 2024, I will have completed sixteen years of service and become eligible for the second ACP. Now for the sake of pending enquiry the department has refused to grant that benefit.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
The departmental enquiry against you remains pending, and no conclusive determination of punishment can be inferred at this stage. Even if the enquiry ultimately results in a penalty, such punishment would be imposed in 2025 or thereafter. Consequently, it stands as an established fact that until 2024—when you became eligible for the Second Assured Career Progression (ACP)—no punishment had been awarded to you.
It is a settled principle of law that any disciplinary action ordinarily takes effect prospectively from the date of its imposition and cannot be applied retrospectively. Therefore, the department lacks the authority to enforce the proposed punishment with retrospective effect.
In the given circumstances your sixteen-year service record remains unblemished up to the date of your ACP eligibility, therefore, you are legally entitled to the benefits of the Second ACP.
To enforce your right, you should file a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of constitution, seeking a mandamus order directing the department to grant you the Second ACP, as no punishment had been imposed on you at the time of eligibility.
Also read: Department is planning to recover more than eight lakh from my salary
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Apr 1, 2025 | Service Matters
Department is planning to recover more than eight lakh from my salary in excess payment made to me from 2009. My case is urgent and I want quick advice from your website. I am employed in the irrigation department and at the post of head clerk. When the increment was added in my salary the department says that was erroneously added in my salary. Now I am going to retire in the month of September. All recovery will start from April 2025. In this situation I will face financial problems and not be able to manage my family. In this situation I have given several representations to the head of the department for not recovering any amount from my salary but it is planning to recover that amount from my salary.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
Based on the facts of your case, it appears that an anomaly in the fixation of your salary occurred in 2009. Now, as you approach retirement, it is evident that the incorrect salary fixation was not due to any fraud or misrepresentation on your part. The error was solely the fault of the department, which miscalculated your salary by wrongly interpreting the applicable rules or laws when adding increments in 2009. You had no role in this process, and therefore, you are not at fault. Any attempt to recover the excess salary from you at this stage would cause you immense hardship.
Your case is directly covered by the legal principles established by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih (2015) 4 SCC 334. In this judgment, the Hon’ble Court held that no recovery can be made from Class III and IV employees who are due to retire within one year, particularly when the anomaly was committed more than five years before the order of recovery.
Additionally, in Col (Retd.) B. J. Akkara vs. Government of India (2006), the Supreme Court ruled that unless an employee has committed fraud or misrepresentation in obtaining an excess salary, the employer has no right to recover that amount.
Given these legal precedents, recovery in your case is not permissible. You should consider filing a writ petition in the High Court to challenge both the recovery order and the refixation of your salary. In light of the Supreme Court’s rulings, the court is likely to grant an immediate stay on the recovery process and ultimately quash the order after providing the government an opportunity to be heard.
Related
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Mar 20, 2025 | Civil Matter
Challenge notice issued under Section 13 of SARFAESI Act in the civil court. The bank has filed an objection under order 7 rule 11 of code of civil procedure for rejection of plaint. The bank says that the subject matter is beyond the jurisdiction of the civil court. As per the legal advice, if the amount of borrowed money is less than ten lakh the civil court has the jurisdiction and beyond ten lakh the debt recovery tribunal has the jurisdiction. In those circumstances I filed a civil suit in the civil court. Bank has issued that notice and demanded to deposit the entire loan amount and outstanding amount. Whereas the interest is more than that mentioned in the loan agreement. The bank is extorting money by levying higher interest rates on the borrowed money. It is a violation of contract hence, I filed a civil suit to stay the proceedings and direct the bank to settle the outstanding as the rate of interest mentioned in the loan agreement.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
To some extent, your advocate is correct, but your case does not fall under the original jurisdiction of the DRT. You want to challenge the validity of the notice or the action initiated by the bank under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. This matter does not relate to the original jurisdiction of the DRT; it falls under the appellate jurisdiction. According to Section 17 of the RDB Act (Recovery of Debt and Bankruptcy Act, 1993), a person aggrieved by any measures referred to in Section 13(4) taken by a secured creditor can make an application to the DRT.
Therefore, the tribunal has the jurisdiction to entertain your application irrespective of the loan amount. Thus, the borrower has a remedy to challenge the validity of the notice issued under Section 13 by filing a Securitization Application (SA) in the DRT. Section 18 of the RDB Act prohibits the civil court from entertaining any suit regarding the action taken by a secured creditor under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act. The tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction in this matter.
According to Section 1(4) of the RDB Act, the provisions of this Act shall not apply where the amount of debt due to any bank or financial institution, or a consortium of banks or financial institutions, is less than ten lakh rupees. However, this restriction only applies to the original jurisdiction. Challenging the validity of the notice under Section 13(4) does not fall under the original jurisdiction of the DRT.
Challenging notice issued under Section 13 of SARFAESI Act is subject matter to debt recovery tribunal instead of the civil court. In the prevailing circumstances, the application filed by the bank under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure is absolutely correct.
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Mar 18, 2025 | Service Matters
Fifty percent gratuity has been withheld by the disciplinary authority. A departmental proceeding was initiated after my retirement. At the time of retirement, payment of gratuity was stopped due to a complaint filed against a few officers. On that complaint no proceeding was initiated when I was in service. After my retirement an inquiry officer was appointed. He submitted a report to the disciplinary authority thereafter, charges were framed and a charge sheet was served to the delinquent officers. Except me, all other officers are in service. The inquiry culminated in a punishment. I have been awarded punishment in the form of fifty percent gratuity and has been withheld and sixteen lakh rupees has been recovered from my pension. I have not been receiving pension after the passing of the punishment order.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
In the present circumstances, the entire disciplinary proceeding against you is illegal because the Governor’s sanction was not obtained. These disciplinary proceedings were initiated after your retirement, and you were not under suspension at the time of retirement.
According to Article 351A of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service Regulations, if disciplinary proceedings are initiated against a retired officer, sanction from the Governor is mandatory. Only the Governor has the authority to withhold pension and other retirement benefits. It is important to note that a departmental proceeding is considered initiated when a charge sheet has been served upon the concerned officer. It is an admitted fact that the charge sheet was served upon you after retirement.
The right to receive a pension was recognized as a right to property by the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in Deokinandan Prasad v. State of Bihar [(1971) 2 SCC 330]. In State of Jharkhand vs Jitendra Kumar Srivastava [(2013) 12 SCC 210], the Supreme Court held that pension and gratuity are not a bounty but the property of the employee, earned during their service, and shall not be withheld except according to the procedure established by law.
In Y. K. Singla vs Punjab National Bank (2013) 3 SCC 472, the Supreme Court held that interest at 8% per annum shall be paid on the amount of gratuity from the date of the employee’s retirement.
Therefore, you should file a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the final order of the disciplinary authority that led to the withholding of fifty percent of your gratuity and the initiation of the recovery of sixteen lakh rupees from your pension. You are also entitled to receive all outstanding retirement dues with interest.
Also read: Transfer order under political influence
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Mar 11, 2025 | Criminal Matter
Compromise in cheque bounce case after conviction is possible or not. I am accused in a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The complainant is my relative and the matter is related to the supply of a disposal making machine including a dryer. When the cheque was issued total liability was around five lakh. Since the complainant is my cousin, I took time to pay that amount. Meanwhile some misunderstanding crept between us and he presented that cheque for encashment. When the cheque was bounced he lodged a complaint against me. Now the court has convicted me for the imprisonment of one year. After conviction I filed an appeal, but during this period some friends and relatives came and compromised the dispute. Now I want to know whether the parties can compromise the cheque bounce case after the conviction.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act makes every offence under the Act compoundable. This section does not impose any restrictions on the stage at which compounding can take place or whether it requires the complainant’s initiation or the court’s permission.
As a result, the court is empowered to compound the case based on a compromise reached between the parties, even at the appellate stage. In O.P. Dholakia v. State of Haryana (2000) 1 SCC 762, the Supreme Court held that the compounding of an offence at a later stage of proceedings is permissible. Therefore, the Negotiable Instruments Act does not prevent the court from compounding an offence at the appellate stage.
When the parties have resolved their dispute through a compromise and the complainant or aggrieved person no longer wishes to prosecute the accused, the court can compound the case and acquit the accused of all charges. However, in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Babulal (2010) 5 SCC 663, the Supreme Court directed that an appellate court may impose a cost on the accused if he opts for a compromise at a later stage of the proceedings. Specifically, at the appellate stage, the accused must pay 15% of the cheque amount before compounding the offence.
Thus, while the court may impose a cost, the compromise and compounding of the offence can still be effectuated at the appellate stage.
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Mar 6, 2025 | Service Matters
High court directed to go for arbitration. The high court has dismissed my writ petition and directed me to go for arbitration for redressal of dispute. I am a project manager in the public works department, and it is a contractual job. Some rules have been framed by the department for payments on the basis of the nature of the job. Whenever a project manager is deployed in the field she is entitled for special wages.
I was deployed in the field for nine months and also have an additional charge of another project. I wrote several letters to the concerned authority to enhance my remuneration but not enhanced. However, in the work agreement it has been mentioned that any dispute regarding salary, increment etc shall be referred to the arbitrator. When I got no response from the department, I filed a writ petition. But that writ petition has been dismissed by the high court. I am in dilemma after judgment of the high court.
Asked from: Haryana
The terms and conditions for contractual employees specifically provide for the resolution of disputes through arbitration. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is applicable in your case. Therefore, any dispute regarding wages shall be decided by an arbitrator. In light of the prevailing work agreement, the High Court cannot entertain your writ petition at this stage.
You have the option to invoke the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and refer the matter to arbitration. If the work agreement designates an officer as an ex officio arbitrator, the dispute shall be referred to that officer. Otherwise, an arbitrator shall be appointed by mutual consent of both parties. Proceedings before the arbitrator are summary in nature, and strict rules of procedure and evidence do not apply. As a result, the arbitral award is typically issued within a short period.
If you are aggrieved by the arbitral award, you may file a writ petition. The High Court may quash the award if it finds irregularities or violations of the principles of natural justice, among other concerns.
Related: Right to promotion when departmental proceedings are pending
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Mar 5, 2025 | Service Matters
Disciplinary authority has appointed second enquiry officer and rejected the report filed by the first enquiry officer. The disciplinary authority is not happy with the report submitted by the enquiry officer. Then the authority appointed another officer with the sole intention to hold me guilty. The current enquiry officer is taking favour of disciplinary authority. The proceeding is conducted under Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rule 1965. The enquiry officer is compelling the witnesses to falsely implicate me. However, no documentary evidence is available to show that I have been involved in the commission of the alleged offence. The department has filed a first information report against three officers. Due to lack of evidence I am not named in that FIR. Whereas, disciplinary authority is willing to array me in that proceedings.
Asked from: Haryana
More than one inquiry is not permissible under Rule 15 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rules, 1965. However, in exceptional circumstances, the disciplinary authority may direct a further inquiry by the same inquiry officer if a serious defect is found in the enquiry report.
The hon’ble Supreme Court has held in K. R. Deb vs CCE (1971) 2 SCC 102 that there can be only one enquiry. The mere non-acceptance of the inquiry officer’s report by the disciplinary authority is not a valid ground for setting aside the inquiry report entirely and ordering a second inquiry.
In this situation, you should challenge the order appointing a second inquiry officer and the initiation of a second inquiry in the same matter. File an original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, as the subsequent inquiry violates Rule 15 of the CCS Rules, 1965. Regarding the partiality of the second inquiry officer, there is no need to challenge it at this stage, as the appointment of the second inquiry officer itself is inherently illegal. The CAT may set aside the order of appointment of the second enquiry officer.
Also read: Disciplinary authority is not taking final decision of enquiry report
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Mar 5, 2025 | Service Matters
Disciplinary authority is not taking action on enquiry report in the last five months. An enquiry was initiated by the disciplinary authority on receiving an anonymous complaint. The said complaint was false and frivolous because the facts stated in that complaint were not related to my nature of job. I am an accountant and my job is to sanction bills and other finance related files after receiving recommendations from the tender and accounts department. there was a system to finalise the bill before sending it to my office for sanction. Two superior officers, one from the tender department and another from the accounts section clears the bill and sends it to my office through a special messenger and marking on the bill. My department has no relation in inviting tender and clearing final bills. The allegation was unrelated to the sanctioning of the bill. it was related to inviting tender. that enquiry officer has exonerated me therefore, the disciplinary authority is not taking any action. My promotion is affected because it has been sealed cover. Please suggest proper legal action.
Asked from: Uttarakhand
You should promptly file a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus against the disciplinary authority. The petition should request the court to direct the disciplinary authority to issue a final decision on the inquiry report within a specified timeframe. If the disciplinary authority fails to comply with the High Court’s directive, you may file a contempt application against them for non-compliance.
Disciplinary authority is bound to take final action on the outcome of enquiry report as early as possible. Causing inordinate delay in conclusion of departmental proceedings is violation of the fundamental right. Fair and speedy justice is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the constitution. Principle of speedy justice is also applicable on quasi-judicial proceedings. Departmental enquiry is a form of quasi-judicial proceeding. Hence, you should file a writ petition for commanding the authority to pass its decision as soon as possible preferably in a stipulated period of time.
Also read: Disproportionate punishment
by Shivendra Pratap Singh | Feb 25, 2025 | Matrimonial Dispute
Whether khula without the consent of the husband is valid in our country or not. My husband is living in the United States of America and does not want to give me divorce. I want to marry another guy who is working in my office in India. My husband neither wants to live with me nor pronounce talaq. He has only one intention to ruin my life by dragging me in marital status. In this situation my life became miserable. I am a childless mother and no one is here to help me. My boyfriend suggested I should take khula from mufti. Then I contacted a mufti who passed a fatwa of khula without the consent of my husband. Can I marry that guy after getting the fatwa? I tried to convince my husband to talk to the mufti ji and give his consent but he refused. He denied his consent and was also not ready to sign the fatwa. I have decided to marry that guy after the fatwa because my husband has made my life miserable.
Asked from: Andhra Pradesh
The consent of the husband is mandatory for khula because in this kind of divorce the wife gives a proposal for dissolution of marriage in return of something. The husband has the option to either accept or refuse that proposal. If the husband accepts that proposal the khula becomes effective.
If the husband’s consent has not been received while passing fatwa of khula by the mufti, that fatwa is void. You are a legally wedded wife because your marriage is still subsisting.
If you marry in the prevailing situation, the marriage will be void and you may be prosecuted for the offence of bigamy. Therefore, you must not proceed further on the basis of the fatwa of khula. That fatwa is not a valid legal document.
It appears from the facts of your case that your marriage cannot be dissolved by mutual consent. In this situation you should consult with the Kazi for passing a judgment of khula after issuing notice to the husband. When the husband appears and gives his consent the Kazi will dissolve your marriage by passing a judgment of khula. That judgment (Kaza) will be a valid legal document for dissolution of marriage. Thereafter, you can marry that person.
Also read: Party cannot treat decree as void
