CVC recommendations against govt officials non-binding on departments

DoPT asked deptts to ensure that complaints against govt employees are disposed of within 6 months

Vigilance clearance for senior government officers has been relaxed by the central government. The change has been effected this month through an order by its Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT).  

The relaxation, which overrides an earlier order of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC), however, will not be applicable to officers of banks and state-run organisations.

The change is significant, as it has been made when Parliament is debating the need to relax a key provision in the Prevention of Corruption Act to offer a larger space to public servants for making decisions. Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said at the Business Standard Annual Awards the government plans to upgrade the Act, last amended in 1988 to "meet the needs of a modern economic system". 

In a related order, the DoPT has asked all departments to ensure that complaints against government employees are normally disposed of within six months. 

Suppose, there is a complaint against a senior government employee for taking a bribe to clear a project. Earlier, the case would be referred to the CVC for inquiry. Once the CVC had given its recommendation either way, the department concerned was supposed to accept it in toto. 

Under the new rules issued by the DoPT, the department will instead have the prerogative to decide whether to accept the recommendation from the CVC or not. It will only need to keep the Union Public Service Commission, which recruits senior government employees, in the loop about the action it proposes to take. So, the decision to go ahead with lower level of punishment or penalty than recommended by the CVC will be the remit of the department, and no further intimation needs to be made to the CVC.

Only if the department decides to drop the charges altogether, it will inform the CVC. But here too, if the CVC insists on framing the same penalty, the case will be referred to the DoPT for the final decision.   

An office memorandum issued this month by the DoPT makes it clear: “All cases, where the Disciplinary Authority (of a department) decides to impose a penalty after conclusion of the proceedings and where UPSC consultation is required as per existing rules/instructions, shall not be referred to the CVC for second stage consultation.” 

The instruction goes on to explain that there was a CVC circular in December 2014 that insisted on exactly the reverse. But the new office memorandum from DoPT notes the CVC has recently clarified the circular would apply only for central public sector undertakings, and public sector banks. besides some other category of employees.

“The above instructions, therefore, do not apply to the cases of the officers of Group A services of the Central  Government (like revenue and railway services), All- India Services (like IAS) and such other categories of officers of the central government where consultation with UPSC is necessary before imposition of any of the prescribed penalties.”

For these officers, if the department decides to drop the charges altogether and, “if CVC advises imposition of a penalty which the (department) on consideration decides not to accept, then this becomes a case of disagreement between (the two) which as per standing instructions require resolution by DoPT”, according to the memorandum.

A source in the CVO confirmed that the new orders have indeed been issued. To make the new provisions apply to bank officials too, the source said this will have to be examined and in any case will have to await changes in the Prevention of Corruption Act. 

In repeated meetings with the prime minister, top officials have pointed out that decision making has become difficult within the government as officers, because of the scare of punishment, often refuse to sign on files. They have pointed out that section 13(d)(iii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 puts the onus on government employees to prove they have not made a decision favouring any particular company or industrial group.

A select committee of Parliament, tasked with the work of finding a satisfactory alternative of the current Act, since the middle of 2016, has not been able to agree on the scope of any amendment that will satisfy the demands of keeping government administration free of corruption and yet provide reasonable safeguards for government employees to do their jobs. 

The DoPT has also advised all central government departments and state governments to ensure inquiries against employees are completed quickly. “All the state governments / Union Territories and cadre-controlling authorities are advised… that the time frames can be strictly adhered to and the inquiry process be completed expeditiously.”

The DoPT wants to ensure that complaints and their resolution do not take indefinite time and resources of the government. For this purpose, officers who face inquiries will get not more than 45 days to give their written version of the events.