Hi: FYI a few of this group members are themselves heading organisations and they are good at what they do. The need of the hour is to raise the voice when such things happen. You need not be a member or head of an organisation, you can do it as an individual. Ms. Jayakumar, for instance, has done her bit by bringing the issue to our attention. The question now is whether some of our members, especially those in the same region or state as the person in question, can do something about this?
Subramani -----Original Message----- From: accessindia-boun...@accessindia.org.in [mailto:accessindia-boun...@accessindia.org.in] On Behalf Of B. R. Nautial Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 10:24 PM To: accessindia@accessindia.org.in Subject: Re: [AI] Pls Advise - Case of Shalini Sethi from Delhi oh! really so bad! but these things are very common with the disabled person because our society is not ready to accept the existence of disabled people in the society. this matter must be discussed in the group and we should have come forward to help the victim. I am really sorry to say that no government agency or voluntary organizations are taking any steppes to avoid such incidents in different government agencies or departments with the disabled peoples. I am sorry to say that most of the voluntary organizations for the blind are being headed by the old and useless people so that they are not able to function properly. In most of the voluntary organizations in India peoples are using the organizations for their own interest and enjoying the donations is being given for the welfare of disabled people. They have no time or interest to come forward for all these issues. This trained must be changed otherwise number of harassment cases will increase continuously. With Regards B. R. Nautial ----- Original Message ----- From: "V. Jayakumar" <jayakumar.vaishn...@gmail.com> To: <accessindia@accessindia.org.in> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 12:29 PM Subject: [AI] Pls Advise - Case of Shalini Sethi from Delhi ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: shalini sethi <ss25134...@yahoo.co.in> Date: Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 1:02 PM Subject: Fw: plight of disabled To: dlu.so...@gmail.com ----- Forwarded Message ---- *From:* shalini sethi <ss25134...@yahoo.co.in> *To:* secy...@nic.in *Sent:* Fri, 21 May, 2010 4:07:00 PM *Subject:* Fw: plight of disabled Respected Madam, 1. I joined the IDBI Bank at its Chandni Chowk branch on 26.11.2007(later shifted to its Rajouri Garden Branch) as Executive , based on my selection in the all India Test conducted by the said Bank, under the quota for persons with disabilities, as per the PwD Act, 1995. This post was initially on contract, to be renewed year-to-year, to be absorbed in the services of the Bank as Assistant Manager, an A category post, on availability of vacancies, performance and a further selection process. 2. I was performing well, doing multi-task duties, as a Teller, handling cash, preparation of demand drafts, handling Demat accounts, tax collection matters. I also worked on cheque clearing seat. During this period I also participated in two training seminars, conducted by the Bank. Trouble started for me when Shri Rajesh Kumar joined this Branch as Head in July, 2008. He was harassing me for no reasons, teasing me on my disabilities, calling me mad, threatening the non-renewal of my contract etc. Things came to peak on 21.11.2008, when I could not bear the daily bickering and indignities any longer, I talked on my mobile to Shri K.P.Nair, Head HRD, who sits at Bombay Headquarters of the Bank, because he had earlier helped me in my posting problem, expecting that he will again sort out my problem. But instead of getting any relief I got a fax from his office at 5.00pm on 25.11.2008, when I was leaving the Bank, after my days work, informing me that my contract is not renewed and that I should apply to the Bank for encashment of my leave etc. I talked to him in the evening the same day on returning home but he informed me that the contract has not been renewed because of performance. When I talked to him about my complaint, he told me that he was looking into the matter. It took the Bank nearly 6 months and several e-mails to honor encashment. 3. Not getting any response, my father wrote to him on 1.1.2009 seeking proper justice, considering that I got this job quite late in my life and now at the age of 38 yrs. I had no further job opportunities; pleading that the state policy is to properly rehabilitate persons like me so that they could live their lives with dignity and self respect to become a part of the mainstream of the Society, but this letter failed to get any response. 4. Realizing that waiting further for justice from the Bank was futility, my father formally lodged the first complaint with the Chief Commissioner for persons with disabilities 24.2.2009, under Sec.59 of the PwD Act, 1995 This relevant Section reads that apart from taking steps to safeguard the rights and facilities made available for persons with disabilities, the Chief Commissioner, on his own motion or on the application of the aggrieved person or otherwise look into the complaints in matters relating to deprivation of rights of persons with disabilities, non-implementation of laws,rules,bye-laws,regulations,executive orders, guidelines or instructions made or issued by the appropriate Governments and the local authorities for the welfare and protection of rights of persons with disabilities, and take up the matter with the appropriate authorities. As per Sec. 63(1) of the Act, the Chief Commissioner for discharging their function under the Act, have the same powers as vested in a court under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while trying a suit in matters like summoning and enforcing the attendance of witnesses; requiring discovery and production of document; requisitioning any public record or copy thereof from any court or office; receiving evidence on affidavits; and issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses and documents. Its proceedings are judicial, within the meaning of Sec.193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code. It is deemed as Civil Court for the purpose of Section 195 and Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 5. In the above said complaint, while explaining the facts it was pointed out that no-renewal of the contract was an act of personal vendetta because I complained against the Branch Head for humiliating me for no reason. I expected that the Chief Commissioner, concerned with the welfare of persons with disabilities and protection of their rights etc. will kindly independently get the complaint investigated and take action against the person who harassed me for no reason leading to deprivation of my right, as a person with disability, for gainful livelihood. It was also explained, enclosing a copy of the terms and conditions, that it was not a contract, where a person was hired only for a specific period, but was a continuing contract from year to year, to be finally absorbed in the post of Assistant Manager, on regular basis, subject to vacancies, performance and a selection process . Subsequently, an e-mail was also sent to him on 1.3.2009, narrating the complete facts of harassment, requesting for a personal hearing I was surprised that two months later, without giving me an opportunity of personal hearing, he unilaterally decided that the Bank had unconditional discretion not to renew the contract, making his intervention inappropriate. He, it seems, also deemed it not necessary to look into my complaint as a person with disabilities for undue harassment. The Chief Commissioner is essentially a welfare officer for the persons with disabilities to look after their rights and welfare, to protect their interest. He has been given a judicial mechanism to quicken the process of justice for persons falling short of abilities. Recruitment through contract, giving absolute right to hire and fire, is not the usual fare with Government bodies. The Chief Commissioner, under the PwD Act is empowered to look into such unusual practices, particularly when it hurt the right of persons with disabilities, whose interest he is supposed to watch. 6. the Deputy Chief Commissioner, my father met to lodge the complaint, demanded to produce information about the number of such Executives recruited since inception of this scheme, number retained, and indicating number from the category of persons with disabilities to enable her office to pursue this case further, whereas her office is duly empowered to collect such information directly from the Bank officially in quick time. My father had no means to supply this information instantly. It took sometime to collect the required information through RTI Act. The information procured from the IDBI Bank is appended at. This information clearly establishes that the Bank is not complying with the extant instructions, guidelines, directions as contained in PwD Act, Sec.33 and36, relating to reservations for persons with disabilities, DOP&T OM dated 29.12.2005. The Bank, after its amalgamation as public sector Bank on 3.10.2006, which made it obligated to follow these extant instructions, guidelines, directions, recruited 5678 A category employees, of which only 54 persons were recruited with disabilities, forming mere 0.95% of the total, as against the requirements of 3%, thus leaving an appalling gap of 116 PwDs short. The information furnished by the Bank that it has only 62 vacancies of PwDs , through RTI, is misleading and incorrect. During this period they also recruited 1623 Executives on contract, in the years 2007 and 2008, with the ultimate objective to absorb them in this A category over a period of 4 yrs. subject to availability of vacancies, performance and further selection process. In this they recruited 38 persons with disabilities, forming 2.34%. I joined as Executive in the 2007 batch. However, by the end of the first year 9 of the 20 PwDs, including me were not continued beyond our first year contract. These Executives fulfilled the prescribed qualification as laid down by the Bank, were selected through all India elaborate test, were interviewed by the worthy senior management of the Bank, and found medically fit in the medical fitness test conducted by the Bank Doctors. The data will explain that the Bank was not fulfilling its required obligation as per the PwD Act and the above cited OM; at the same time was also not serious to retain the PwDs recruited through their due selection process. Supported by this data, my father again approached the Chief Commissioner for Persons with Disabilities on 17.8.2009, requesting him to again look into my case, more so because of new emerging facts to give me proper justice by directing my reinstatement in as Executive in the Bank, also, if needed, relaxation of standard as directed under DOP&T OM 29.12.2005 as also appropriate action against the Branch Head, who unduly harassed me leading to losing my job. 7. I am sorry to say that the Chief Commissioner office, ordained to provide me quick justice, delayed the matter unnecessarily. After nearly 2 months on 16.10.2009 merely advised the Bank to take action in accordance with the Dop&T OM No.36012/23/2009-Estt(Res) dated 4.5.2009 issued in pursuance to order dated 19.12.2008 of the Hon'ble High court of Delhi in W.P.(C)No.15828/2006 for compliance. The Chief Commissioner office, however, forgot to forward a copy of my complaint to the Bank, on which it was seeking action, resulting in further delay.. I could not locate the above OM on the website, as claimed. I found that the said letter did not give any binding direction to the Bank. Therefore, I had to request again to the Chief Commissioner to arrange proper hearing of the case in terms of Rule 42 framed under PwD Act. After a long wait the hearing came up on 22.3.2010. The order passed dated 5.4.2010 disposing off the case without considering the facts. The Chief Commissioner did not give proper consideration to our first application dated 24.2.2009and E-mail sent on 1.3.2009 ,. It was his binding duty under Sec.59 of the PwD Act to look into my complaint about the maltreatment and misbehavior of the Branch Head..(also please read pares4, 5&6 of the facts mentioned above) Our representation dated 17.8.2009 was based on the facts and data collected from IDBI which clearly proved that the Bank was not following the extant instructions, guidelines and directions as contained in PwD Act and DOP&T OM 29.12.2005 and accordingly the DCC advised the Bank to these extant instructions etc.Their letter dated 16.10,2009 was incomplete and had to be sent again on 7.12.2009, because of negligence of his office, not forwarding my said representation, containing the vital facts and data, causing unnecessary delay in the proceedings. It was not an appropriate order as per procedure prescribed in Rule 42, framed under PwD Act, and therefore, vide my letter dated 19.11.2009, I made a request seeking, proper hearing as per the laid down procedure, explained in para 7 of the facts. 1. the assessment was made at the last moment in hurry after I complained against the Branch Head; copies of 3 E-mails submitted do not prove anything but rather seem to prove my charge of mischief played by the inmical Branch Head; there is no previous assessment to prove that I was deficient in my work and behavior; the General Manager HRD Corporate office never visited the Branch to make any personal assessment; it clearly proves that the non-renewal of my contract was personal vendetta of the Branch Head, after I complained against him; the action was taken in undue hurry ; I complained against the Branch Head on 21.11.2008 and within 4 days I was thrown out of the Bank. I am sorry to say that the Deputy Chief Commissioner has not tried to look into these facts that were duly placed before him resulting in his erroneous order He has completely ignored the extant instructions. Guidelines and directions of the appropriate Government. The post of Executive on contract was a route to selection to the regular post of Assistant Managers and their continuance and absorption was definitely relaxation at the time of selection and applicable, as per Dop&t OM dated 29.12.2005. Besides, being designated as supposed welfare officer for persons with disabilities, he has not bothered to look into my complaint of harassment and maltreatment, despite my placing complete facts and incidents of harassment before him, not denied and refuted by any of the respondents present. He it seems did not consider it necessary to explain the charges again him. He seems to be too lenient to him for reasons best known to him. I am a disabled person who is fighting a case against IDBI Bank for non renewal of contract & mental harassment under DOP&T OM Act in disabled court for a year. On 19 oct. 2009 disabled court told IDBI Bank to consider their under DOPT & OM ground without hearing.I made a complaint to you regarding this. My complaint no.is prsec/e/2010/03840.I am39 years old with almost nil job opportunities in govt. sector My assigned officer was Ms.Vandita Kaul but was told she is unavailable. I took appointment to meet Mr.S.K. Patnaik.When I reached shastri bhawan I was told that he too was unavailable . so I met Dr. Arbind Prasad & asked him to intervene. He assured me to help me. Now disabled court has disposed off my case under minor ground. Govt. is saying on one side to rehabilitate disabled person on the other side rehabilted person is thrown out of the organization. Please help me to get my job back Shalini B-1-B, MIG, Flats, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 PH 01125134416 M 09311275958 ---------------------- ----- Forwarded Message ---- *From:* "helpl...@rb.nic.in" <helpl...@rb.nic.in> *To:* ss25134...@yahoo.co.in *Sent:* Sun, 14 March, 2010 1:57:25 PM *Subject:* Online Request/Grievance registration in President's Secretariat He lpline *Dear Sir/Madam, * Your Request/Grievance has been registered vide Registration number *PRSEC/E/2010/03840 *.Please quote the same in your future correspondance. ------------------------------ -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Pablo Picasso - "Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------- > Voice your thoughts in the blog to discuss the Rights of persons with > disability bill at: > http://www.accessindia.org.in/harish/blog.htm > > To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, > please visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.i n Voice your thoughts in the blog to discuss the Rights of persons with disability bill at: http://www.accessindia.org.in/harish/blog.htm To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.i n Voice your thoughts in the blog to discuss the Rights of persons with disability bill at: http://www.accessindia.org.in/harish/blog.htm To unsubscribe send a message to accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
