Enter Keyword and Search





Tuesday, February 16, 2010

MAJOR PENALTY PROCEEDINGS RECOMMENED AGAINST 70 OFFICERS

with 0 Comment


CVC disposed of 468 cases in December 2009

The Central Vigilance Commission disposed of 468 cases during December 2009 referred to it for advice. The Commission advised initiations of major penalty proceedings against 70 officers. Of these, 20 were from public sector banks, 17 from M/o Railways, 11 from Northern Coalfields Ltd., 4 from Western Coalfields Ltd., 3 from MCD, 2 each from Ministry of Home Affairs and Central Board of Excise and Customs. The remaining 9 cases pertained to different departments of the Government of India and PSUs.

The Commission also advised imposition of major penalty against 66 officers including 13 from MCD, 11 from Public Sector Banks, 9 from M/o Railways, 6 from Central Board of Excise and Customs, 4 each from M/o Commerce and Central Coalfields Ltd., 3 each from Central Warehousing Corp. Ltd. and Hindustan Paper Corpn., 2 each from D/o Telecommunication, Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Khadi & Village Industries Commission and M/o of Textiles. Remaining 3 cases pertained to different departments of the Government of India and PSUs.

The Commission disposed 1122 complaints during the month. Of these, 1021complaints were sent for necessary action/ATR whereas 101 complaints were sent for investigation and report.

On the Commission’s recommendations, the competent authorities issued sanctions for prosecution against 12 officers including 5 from M/o P,PG & Pensions, 2 from Punjab National Bank and 1 each from CBDT, M/o External Affairs, CBEC, M/o of Small Scale Industry and M/o of Commerce.

Recoveries to the tune of Rs. 68.63 crore were affected after Commission conducted technical examination of some departments.

CAT clears air on promotion benefits

with 4 comments


If an employee, fulfiling the eligibility criteria for promotion to a particular post, works for a reasonable period on that post against a vacancy,, the government cannot deny him/her the actual promotion and accompanying financial benefits, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has held.

A Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) bench headed by Chairman Justice V.K. Bali held that in such a situation, it would be arbitrary to deny salary and other benefits of the promoted post to the employee.

The bench ordered the Delhi Government to re-fix the salary and retirement benefits of six retired school teachers, who had been given notional promotion to the post of principal, albeit without any accruing financial benefits.

Rejecting the Delhi Government’s arguments that all promotions had to be prospective and retired employees had no right to actual promotion, the CAT allowed the petition filed by Gaurishankar Sharma, Budh Prakash Tyagi, Raj Kumar Uppal, Prabhu Dayal, Jagdish Prasad Sharma and Chintamani Mathur.

It directed the Delhi Government to fix the correct salary of the petitioners, from the dates each of them had been promoted notionally to principal and to fix par arrears of salary for the period they were in service.

The CAT also ordered payment of revised retirement benefits, with six per cent interest on arrears within four months. The petitioners had served as heads of schools over several years.

But the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), held after their retirement, recommended only notional promotion for them and accordingly, the government did not give them any financial benefit of promotion.

Aggrieved by the decision, they moved the CAT, seeking benefit of the pay scale of principal, from the date they were assumed charge of the post, plus the arrears of pay and allowances after proper pay fixation, with retrospective effect. They also demanded revision of their retirement benefits.

The government contended the DPC could not be convened due to procedural reasons while they were in service and making them principals was only a stopgap arrangement. It said petitioners were not eligible for revision of retirement benefits and back wages because their promotion was only notional.

But citing the Supreme Court’s rulings on the issue, the CAT rejected these arguments.

“By virtue of the fact that the Applicants have actually worked on the post of principal, they would …be eligible for payment of back wages also, besides salary for the post of principal, from the date they have been notionally promoted to that post,” it said.
Source: Hindustan Times



Disclaimer:As and when orders amending the rules are published by the Government, the amendment orders will be published in our blog immediately. Readers are requested to refer to the source link is given at the end of the post. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy of the content on this blog, the same should not be construed as a statement of law or used for any legal purposes. 90paisa accepts no responsibility in relation to the accuracy, completeness, usefulness or otherwise, of the contents. Users are advised to verify/check any information with the relevant department(s) and/or other source(s), and to obtain any appropriate professional advice before acting on the information provided in the blog. Links to other websites that have been included on this blog are provided for public convenience only. 90paisa is not responsible for the contents or reliability of linked websites and does not necessarily endorse the view expressed within them. We cannot guarantee the availability of such linked pages at all times.

Recent Posts