Ex-coal secy conviction won't hurt officers' morale: Jitendra Singh

Govt bids goodbye to 129 'non-performing' babus in public interest

Days after the conviction of former coal secretary H C Gupta by a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) special court, Minister of State (Prime Minister’s Office) Jitendra Singh (pictured) said the sentence would not hurt the morale of officers. 

Singh, who also heads the department of personnel, public grievances and pensions, also said there was no move to raise the retirement age for central government officers.

Analysing the performance of the Narendra Modi-led government in the past three years, Singh said it had been successful in making the work environment friendly for senior civil servants, “after a 10-year nightmare of administration” under the previous one. “This is not a vindictive government and the officers realise the difference,” he added.

Gupta has been sentenced to a two-year-long jail term by the court for allegedly favouring a company, Kamal Sponge Iron and Steel, in the allocation of a coal block, during his tenure as secretary in the coal ministry. 

Singh also said as many as 129 government officers have been forced to retire in the past few months in public interest for being non-performers. “A total of 30 Group A officers and 99 Group B officers (total 129) have been sent on retirement in past few months,” he said. The punishment of compulsory retirement was given after reviewing service records of over 24,000 Group A officers and 42,251 Group B officers. He said the authorities are looking into the service records of another 34,451 Group A officers and 42,521 from Group B to check the non-performers.

Referring to the coal case, the minister said while the government would not interfere with the role of constitutional bodies or the prosecuting agencies like the CBI, it had also moved amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act in Parliament to separate genuine mistakes from mischief. The amendments moved in Parliament in November 2015 make it explicit that the government’s sanction would be necessary for prosecuting any government employee on economic offences, he said. “It was earlier required only for officers of the rank of joint secretary and above.”

According to Additional Advocate General for Haryana and Uttar Pradesh, Arun Kumar, the amendments had made formal what the CBI was in any case doing as a practice. He said this had become necessary as the Supreme Court had served conflicting judgments on the need for government permission.

The minister said the promised amendments offered an assurance to civil servants to perform to the best of their potential, without being intimidated. “Performing officers have the satisfaction that a prosecution case, once begun, will not stretch indefinitely, and neither will there be an arbitrary transfer,” he said.

Singh said the difference with which the government at the Centre handled transfers and posting had become noticeable. “The same Cabinet secretary continued with us, though he had served the earlier government.” In this context, he made his preference clear for officers to be posted in ministries or departments where they demonstrate their ability.

About bringing in more skill-sets in the decision-making process within the government, Singh said people should be encouraged to serve where they could perform better. He referred to the case of a senior officer in the tourism department, who was transferred despite having acquired a doctoral degree from abroad in tourism. He said she wasted her last years in the service trying to come back to the ministry. “These are the pitfalls we are trying to avoid,” he said.

The way to ensure this was not repeated, he said, was for the department of administrative reforms to be used as a research and development organisation. “Just as the private sector has one (for HR research), we, in the government, should also have one”. 

About repeated reports on changes in the retirement age for civil services, the minister said there were no plans to reduce or raise it from the current 60 years. “We have received some inputs arguing the need for raising the age limit, but I want to make clear there have been no thoughts on the subject.” The only change the government wanted to make was in the case of doctors and that had already been notified, he said.