Changing a 50 year old rule, GOI (DOP&T) sets a deadline of six months to complete probe of govt babus in corruption cases. It has amended Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, by laying down a time-line for intermediate stages of investigation and enquiry proceedings.
But, why is MOS ( Personnel) trumpeting this as part of his three years achievement? Why, so much media hype? Analyse ground realities. CVC’s perennial concern over delay in expediting corruption by adhering to time- schedule for completion of disciplinary proceedings is ignored by central ministries. Though, a Statutary body, CVC is treated as a tooth-less tiger. Consider judicial pronouncement. Supreme court’s judgement of Dec 16,2015 ( ( Prem Nath Bali V/s Registrar, Delhi High court )directedthat every employer, State and Private, must conclude departmental proceedings against their delinquent employeeswithin six months. So, what is new? Orders should have been issued in 2015 across the board.
Anomaly. Why create a dichotomy between All-India and Central services? It is not clear why All-India services : IAS, IPS and IFoS—and a “few other categories “ of officers, are not covered under the amendment. Are top babus from elite Services , never involved in big-ticket scams. Orders may not stand scrutiny in Courts of Law on sheer ground of discrimination. All employees, irrespective of Services, must be treated at par. Right to Equality before Law One wonders whether penalties are laid down for defaulters (disciplinary authorities or delinquent officers) for non- adherence of stage-by stage schedules. Obfuscating proceedings before the Inquiry Officers (IO), CATs and Courts, are common. Lakhs of corruption cases are pending before CATs , courts for years. Adjournments and bails are granted on flimsy grounds. There is a flourishing racket involving lawyers and corrupt judges. Action may be ordered by the Hon’ble CJI to reduce pendency by fast-tracking CATs and Courts’ proceedings. All adjournment cases must be scrutinized by High court judges and subordinate judges reprimanded, wherever required. Considering the totality of circumstances, DOP&T’s amendment orders are discriminatory, facetious and out-of-sync with GOI’s stated policy.
The Single Point directive, struck down by Supreme court, was restored by GOI through legislative route. Rules require prior sanctions of GOI and CVC, before initiating enquiry against officers of the rank of Joint Secretaries and above. What will be the impact of amendment on corrupt top officers who enjoy immunity from CBI preliminary enquiries? Selective application of rules to target specific Services is unjust and unfair unfair.
495d8f5f-feb2-4e46-ab97-2c7242219346|0|.0|96d5b379-7e1d-4dac-a6ba-1e50db561b04
Tags: