Prasar Bharati talks tough on Suryadevara's deputation

Hardening its stand on the extended deputation of its officer Prasanna Kumar Suryadevara as Delhi Assembly Secretary, Prasar Bharati has directed him to join his parent organisation immediately failing which he will be treated to be on "unauthorised absence".

Suryadevara, originally an officer of Newsreader-cum- Translator (Telugu) cadre, was appointed to the post of Delhi Assembly Secretary last July for a year.

Speaker Ram Niwas Goel had requested Prasar Bharati to extend his stay as Assembly Secretary.

However, Prasar Bharati expressed inability to extend the deputation and asked the Delhi government to repatriate him, saying it was in dire need of experienced professionals.
 

Last week Lt Governor Najeeb Jung issued order to repatriate Suryadevara.

But the Speaker refused to relieve him.

Goel had said the LG cannot repatriate the Assembly Secretary without his concurrence since he (Suryadevara) is holding constitutional post.

Prasar Bharati then in an office memorandum issued on September 2 said, "You (Suryadevara) have been relieved from Govt of NCTD Delhi and repatriated with directions to report to DG, Air. However, You have not reported for duty to DG, AIR till date."

"You are hereby directed to report for duty immediately failing which you will be treated on unauthorised absence," it said.

The public broadcaster has also issued a show cause notice to Suryadevara over a newspaper article written by him in June - 'Neither Office, Nor Profit' - finding it "critical" of the Centre, which is in "violation of the Conduct Rules".

Prasar Bharati has directed Suryadevara to reply on the matter within seven days.

"It has also come to notice of DG, AIR that you have published an article titled 'Neither Office, Nor Profit' on June 21, 2016 wherein you have criticised certain action of the Central government," Prasar Bharati said.

"This act is in violation of Rule 9 of CCS Conduct Rules. You are hereby directed to explain within seven days of issue of this letter why disciplinary action should not be initiated against you," it added.