Sir, please help me. I had joined Axis Bank in May 2018 but fell sick. I had informed my supervisors about it, but they terminated me. Can I join Axis Bank again?
In general, an employee who has been terminated by a bank can potentially rejoin the same bank, but it would depend on the specific circumstances of their termination and the bank's policies.
If the termination was due to a violation of the bank's policies or code of conduct, it may be more difficult for the employee to be rehired. However, if the termination was due to reasons beyond the employee's control, such as illness or redundancy, there may be a greater chance of being rehired.
Additionally, banks often have specific policies in place regarding the rehiring of former employees, and these policies may differ depending on the bank and the circumstances of the termination. Therefore, it would be best for the employee to check with the bank's HR department regarding their specific situation and the bank's policies on rehiring former employees.
Essential ingredients of a gift deed. My aunt, who is my dad's brother's wife, wants to gift me a sum of money for my marriage, and we want to register this gift deed. What clauses can we add to the gift deed to ensure the following? The gift deed is not signed under any undue influence, coercion, or fraud, but rather it is signed willingly and with her full consent. None of her children, grandchildren, or legal heirs have any objections or reservations about the gift deed, and they cannot legally claim the gifted amount back from me as the donee. Should we obtain the signatures of her children on the gift deed to confirm that they are aware of the gift and that they have no objections to it? After the registration process is complete, how can we check the registered deed?
A gift deed is a legal document used to transfer ownership of property or assets from one person to another without any consideration or payment. In India, the essential ingredients of a gift deed are as follows:
- Parties involved: The gift deed must clearly state the names and addresses of the donor (the person giving the gift) and the donee (the person receiving the gift).
- Description of the property: The gift deed must include a detailed description of the property being gifted. This includes the location, area, boundaries, and any other relevant details.
- Consideration: Unlike a sale deed, a gift deed does not involve any consideration or payment. The deed should clearly state that the transfer is a gift and is being made without any payment.
- Voluntary transfer: The transfer of ownership must be voluntary and made without any coercion, force, or undue influence. The donor must be of sound mind and capable of making the gift.
- Acceptance: The donee must accept the gift in writing, and the acceptance must be included in the gift deed. The donee must also sign the deed to acknowledge receipt of the gift.
- Registration: In India, a gift deed must be registered with the appropriate authority to be considered valid. The deed must be signed by the donor, the donee, and two witnesses in the presence of a sub-registrar.
- Taxes and fees: The donor may be required to pay taxes and fees on the property being gifted. This may include stamp duty, registration fees, and capital gains tax.
It is important to consult with a lawyer to ensure that all legal requirements are met and that the gift deed is properly executed.
Government has deliberately changed the promotion policy to promote specific officers. The department has changed the old promotion policy after receiving approval from the governor. The 1986 rule has been completely replaced to promote junior officers who have additional qualifications. However, these qualifications were not required at the time of my joining the department. Later, some internal courses were conducted by the department to improve the officers' efficiency, resulting in the eligibility of very junior officers for promotion.
This new promotion policy has curtailed the rights of senior officers, and the state government has entirely ignored the services rendered by them. As senior officers, we are facing humiliation because our junior officers will be promoted and rule over us in the department. We want to set aside this new promotion policy and apply the old policy, which was adopted in 1986.
The state has the power to make a new promotion policy. Employees of the state have no right to challenge the new promotion policy on the grounds that the old policy was better. It is the prerogative of the state, and also, the court shall not interfere in the policy matters of the state.
Therefore, if you want to challenge the new promotion policy on the basis of reasonableness, you have to prove that there is some element which is against the provisions of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
However, if you want to challenge the new promotion policy only on the grounds that it is not better than the old policy, you must show that there is some flaw in the new policy.
In Veerendra Huda versus State of Haryana, the Honourable Supreme Court has held that when the state declares a policy regarding the manner of filling up a post, and the said policy is not contrary to the rules, the employee must follow the same and cannot challenge the policy simply because they feel it would not have been fair or logical, as per the old policy.
If you want to challenge the new promotion policy in the High Court, you have to prove that there is some arbitrariness or lack of intelligible differentia. If there is a lack of direct nexus between the object sought by the state and the formulation of the new policy, this can also constitute a ground for quashing the new policy.
Regarding the facts of this case, there is a clear distinction between the old policy and the new policy. The old policy was silent about the enhancement of specialist skills of employees who had completed specific courses, which could enhance their efficiency in the discharge of their duties. Therefore, they could be the best-suited candidates for promotion. If this is the objective of the new policy, then there is no ground to challenge it.
Retiral benefits have not been sanctioned after technical resignation. I served in Medical Education for 37 years in the Government of Madhya Pradesh in Bhopal and was entitled to a pension after retirement. I sought and received permission (NOC) after completing 37 years of government service to appear for an examination/interview for the position of Professor at AIIMS in Raipur, Chhattisgarh. I was selected for the position, but my previous employer relieved me on technical resignation. However, my pension gratuity has not been sanctioned. Please advise me on what to do next.
Your first step should be to send a representation to the concerned authority in your department, seeking clarification on why your retiral benefits have not been sanctioned. If you do not receive a satisfactory response, you can consider filing a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Keep in mind that retiral benefits are not a form of bounty. In the case of Jitendra Kumar Singh vs State of Jharkhand, the court ruled that the government is obligated to provide retirement benefits to an employee who has not been subjected to any disciplinary or criminal proceedings. Therefore, if you have not faced any such action, the government cannot withhold your retiral benefits.
It's important to note that if there are no disciplinary or criminal proceedings pending against you, the government must provide you with your retiral benefits. This is not just a matter of generosity; it is a legal obligation. In the event that your benefits have been withheld without justification, you may want to send a representation to the department and file a writ petition in the High Court if necessary.
My sister and her husband are not willing to go back to their home. Our concern is that we are four siblings and all of us are daughters. Our residence is in Hinganghat (Wardha) district, Maharashtra. Two of the four sisters are married. Our father passed away eleven years ago, and our home is now in the name of our mother. Currently, our elder sister, who is married, has left her marital home due to differences with her husband and in-laws.
They have since reconciled, but she is not willing to go back to their home and instead wants her husband to stay with us. Our mother is against this, as he does not have a job and neither does our sister.
My younger sister and I take care of our mother and send her money for her expenses, but our elder sister and her husband are not contributing financially as they are both jobless. They are now causing trouble for our mother by staying with us.
We would like to know if a son-in-law can stay in our house forcefully, especially when there are only women in the house who are supporting him financially. Please advise and help us with this situation.
Since your mother is the absolute owner of the property, your sister and her husband have no right to it. If your mother does not want them to live with her, she has the right to evict them from the house. It appears that they may have an ulterior motive, which is to acquire the house.
Your mother should consider filing a civil suit against them under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act of 2007. This special act was enacted to provide maintenance and security to senior citizens. If the occupants of the house are causing violence or interfering with the peaceful living of the senior citizens, the court has the power to evict them by using force.
You can file a civil suit under Section 22 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act of 2007. This type of proceeding is summary, and the court must decide the case within six months.
Sexual relations with free consent of parties. I have a sexual relations with my student with our free consent. May it constitute an offence? Please advice.
Sexual relations between consenting adults are a private matter and are generally not regulated by the law. The general principle is that what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home is their own business and should not be interfered with by the state or other third parties.
Firstly, it is important to note that sexual relations with a person who does not have the capacity to give their consent, such as a minor or a person who is mentally or physically incapacitated, is illegal and considered as sexual assault or rape.
In cases where both parties are of legal age and have the capacity to give their consent, it is still important to ensure that the consent is freely given. This means that the consent is not obtained through coercion, deception, or threat of harm. If there is any doubt about the freely given nature of the consent, it is always better to err on the side of caution and refrain from engaging in sexual activity.
Another important consideration is the presence of any power imbalance between the parties. For example, sexual relations between a teacher and student, employer and employee, or doctor and patient are generally considered unethical and may even be illegal in some jurisdictions due to the potential for abuse of power.
In cases where there is a power imbalance, it is important to ensure that the sexual relationship is not exploitative and does not violate any professional or ethical codes of conduct. For example, a doctor should not engage in sexual relations with a patient, as it could compromise the doctor's ability to provide unbiased and professional medical care.
It is also important to be aware of the laws and cultural norms of the jurisdiction in which the sexual relations are taking place. In some countries, certain sexual acts may be illegal or considered taboo, even if both parties have given their consent. It is important to understand and respect the laws and cultural norms of the jurisdiction to avoid any legal or social consequences.
In conclusion, sexual relations with free consent of parties are generally legal and ethical as long as both parties are of legal age, have the capacity to give their consent, and the consent is freely given. However, it is important to take into account any power imbalances, laws, and cultural norms to ensure that the sexual relations are not exploitative or illegal.
My boyfriend doesn't want to solemnise the marriage against the will of his parents. What do I do if the parents of my boyfriend do not accept me because of caste. My boyfriend is also telling me that he will marry after they agree, otherwise we have to choose our own paths. How do I marry him !? Is this possible in the present situation?
You both are adults and attained valid age for marriage. In this situation, consent of parents is not necessary. You can solemnise marriage with your own consent.
However, if your boyfriend is unwilling to go against his parents' wishes and marry you, you cannot force him to do so. In this situation, it may be beneficial to speak with his parents and attempt to convince them to agree to the marriage.
Inter-caste marriage is legally valid under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, and there are no legal obstacles to an inter-caste marriage. If his parents are willing to accept your relationship, you can proceed with the marriage.
Married woman affair with an unmarried boy. I am married and not divorced yet, I have an affair with an unmarried boy who made false promises of marriage and made physical relationship with me and now he denied to marry me. What should I do now
You are a married woman hence, you cannot solemnise a second marriage without getting divorce. That sexual relationship was established due to your free consent. Being a married woman you must be aware that the sexual relations with another man is immoral, unlawful and illegal.
In this situation the fact of "false promise of marriage" does not give you any right to sue that man for the sexual relationship in the guise of false marriage. If you initiate any legal action against him it gives your husband a right to seek divorce on the ground of adultery.
You should forget all those things and be loyal to your husband. Don't indulge in an unfruitful legal action to punish that man for his false promise of marriage.
Can I purchase a property from a person against my previous transactions to that person, and if that property is mortgaged with a bank then how safe is it to buy.
Yes, you can purchase a property from a person with whom you have had previous transactions, as long as the property is legally transferable and the seller has the right to sell it. However, it is important to conduct a thorough due diligence on the property before making the purchase to ensure that there are no legal issues or pending disputes related to the property.
If the property is mortgaged with a bank, it is important to verify the status of the mortgage and whether the seller has obtained a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the bank. The NOC is a legal document that confirms that the bank has no objection to the sale of the property, and that the mortgage has been cleared or will be cleared from the proceeds of the sale. If the seller has not obtained an NOC, the bank may still have a claim on the property, and this can create legal complications for the buyer.
Hello, my land is located in Telangana and the government is constructing a radial road that will pass through my land. However, the construction of the road has been on hold for the past 6 years and the road is currently 4km away from my land. My question is, can I sell the land during pendency of civil suit?
Asked from: Telangana
If there is no court order preventing the sale of the land, then you may sell it. However, since there is pending litigation in respect of this property, it is considered a suit property.
Generally, the court orders to maintain the status quo until the suit is disposed of. Therefore, if there is a court order staying the sale, you cannot sell the land while the suit is pending.
If the court has not issued any such order, the suit property can be sold. However, the proposed sale will be subject to the final decree of the civil suit.
The buyer will be bound to comply with the final decree of the court because they purchased the land during the pendency of the civil suit.
also read:
