Departmental proceedings against Government servants consultation with the Union Public Service Commission for advice.

The undersigned is directed to say that this Department has been impressing upon various Ministries/Departments to complete  the disciplinary proceedings  by minimizing avoidable delays.  In para 3.11.10 of the 4th   report of the 2nd   ARC titled “Ethics  i n   governance”,  it  has been observed from  a  sample study  that  the Administrative Departments take more than 213th  of the time taken  to  process the case under the  CCS(CCA)  Rules. In the sample  study, the Inquiry Officers were found to  be taking about  17% of the time  and the UPSC about 5% of the time to conclude their findings. This Department has issued OM No.39011/12/2009-Estt.(B) dated 14.9.2010 reiterating that the  requisite details in the  proforma to be sent to the UPSC are properly filled  up and sent with the relevant documents so that there does  not  arise occasion for  the  UPSC  to  make  a  back reference  to the Ministries/Departments for the deficiencies found by the Commission in the  papers sent to them.

2.  The UPSC has brought to the notice of this Department that during the  year 2010-1 1 the Commission  had to  return the case to the  concerned Departments in more than  40%  of the  cases  on account  of  procedural/documentary deficiencies. A list of the common deficiencies observed  by the Commission i n  these cases are given in the Annexure. All Ministries/Departments are requested to ensure that the deficiencies indicated in the Annexure are not repeated in the proposals being sent to the UPSC for seeking its advice on disciplinary matters.

3.  Attention of  Ministries/Departments is also drawn to  this Department’s OM No.39011/12/2009 -Estt.(B) dated 16.11.2010 wherein it has been requested that in cases where  the  Courts  are being apprised of the time taken  in  finalizing  a disciplinary proceeding through affidavit, information in  regard to the  pendency of the matter before the UPSC may be correctly projected.  The average time taken by the Commission  in  tendering  advice  in  disciplinary proceedings  is  about  4 to 6 months. The Commission tender its advice in about 3 months in those cases where priority is  attached  due to direction of  Court.  In such  cases,  in  order to  expedite  scrutiny of the cases a single window system on pilot basis had been introduced in the  UPSC from September 2010  and  initially  9  Ministries/Departments were included in the single window system.  The Commission has now decided to extend the  single window  system  to  all other Ministries/Departments whose offices  are situated in Delhi for submission of disciplinary cases involving court cases. Under this system,  a  Ministry/Department  while  referring the disciplinary cases  to  the Commission for advice, is  required to authorize a representative, not below the level of Under Secretary, to  hand over the case to the designated officer in  the UPSC, with  prior appointment.  The cases received from a Ministry/Department are initially scrutinized on the  spot,  i n  terms of information sought in  the  Proforma  check  list issued by this Department.  Only cases which are complete as per the check list are accepted by the Commission for further scrutiny and examination. Incomplete cases are  returned at the  counter itself after pointing out the deficiencies.  In  UPSC, the case  records are  to  be  handed  over  to  the Under  Secretary(S-1),(Tel No.23387346/23098591-Ext.4342) i n  Room No.10-A located in the Annexure Building of  the Commission. The case records should explicitly indicate the status of the CAT/Court cases, the fact regarding the time limit for disposal of the case if any and extension sought for providing at  least  3-4  months  of  time to  the  Commission for disposal of the case.

4.  All  Ministries/Departments are  requested to adhere to the above procedure for submission  of  disciplinary cases involving Court cases to the Commission through single window system.

(C.A. Subramanian)
Director
All Ministries/Departments of Government of India.

ANNEXURE to OM No.39035/01/2011 -Estt.(B) dated 10th May. 2011

1. The  documents  indicated  i n   proforma/checklist  not  duly referenced with page  number, folder name etc.

2. Vague  comments/information e.g.  ‘….’  o r  ‘do’  i n  the  proforma were  mentioned.

3. The documents were not original or duly authenticated.

4. Photocopies were signed in  black ink.

5. The exhibits and other documents were not legible.

6. Documents i n  regional language:-
(a) Translation not provided.
(b) Translation unauthenticated.

7. I n  case o f  retired CO, the information like last pay drawn, monthly pension and gratuity were not provided.  No specific information provided whether pension and/or gratuity i s  withheld or released.

8. Para-wise comments of the DA o n  the representation of the CO on IO Report were not part of the record.

9. Daily Order Sheets were not available for all the dates of hearing.

10. In  minor  penalty  cases,  the  Relied  Upon  Documents  (RUDs) referred in  the statement of imputation were  not forwarded and not properly referenced.

11. The  column related to  general  examination  o f  the  CO  did  not clearly indicate the reference of related papers.

12. In case of disagreement of DA with 10  Report, a tentative note of disagreement was not forwarded to  the CO.

13. The  para-wise comments of the  DA  did  not  address the points raised by the CO i n  h i s  reply.

14. In case of pension cut proposals, the approval of President was not taken. The approval of the President in  all pension cut cases is  mandatory.

15. The  DA in  a large number of cases, expresses opinion regarding the quantum or penalty or amount of  pension cut to  be imposed on the CO.

16. Procedure  of  prescribed Complaints  Committee on  Sexual Harassment were not followed