20. Combating corruption in public services. Suspension of corrupt officers on whom criminal misconduct cases – Instructions – Issued.
(Memo. No. I9179/Ser.C/2003, G.A. (Ser.C) Department , Dated 18-12-2003)
Ref : – 1. U.O. Note No. 240/SC.D/93-3, G.A. (Ser.D) Department , dated 05-10-1993.
2. U.O. Note No.1595/SC.D/93-6, G.A.(SC.D) Department , dated 16-11-1994.
3. Memo. No. 554/Ser.C/93-6, G.A. (Ser.C) Department , dated 26-12-1994.
4. Government U.O. Note No. 1818/Spl.B/2000-2, dated 21-11-2001.
5. Government Memo. No. 596/Spl.B/2000-6, dated 10-06-2002.
Order: – To eliminate the long delays occurring in the matter of prompt suspension of corrupt officers both pending enquiry / trail and dismissal as contemplated in APCS (CC&A) Rules, 1991, Government have issued instructions from time to time in the references cited. To bring clarity, the Government instructions are summarized as below :–
Suspension of officers involved in Trap cases of the ACB:
Officers involved in trap cases shall be suspended immediately upon receipt of preliminary report from the ACB – irrespective of the fact whether the officer is involved directly or indirectly in the act of accepting bribe and irrespective of the fact whether the phenolphthalein test yielded positive result or not.
Suspension of officers involved in Disproportionate Assets cases:
Based on the preliminary report and recommendation of the DG, ACB, Hyd., for suspension of officers involved in disproportionate assets cases, orders of suspension shall be issued promptly. Further based on the recommendation of the DG., ACB., Hyd., properties of officers against whom disproportionate cases are initiated, should be permitted to be attached under relevant sections of Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 1944.
The Departments of Secretariat, Heads of Departments and District Collectors are requested to follow the above instructions strictly without any deviation in placing the employees under suspension in the above referred cases. They are further requested to bring the same to the notice of all concerned for strict compliance.
21. Review of orders of suspension of Government Servants – Existing orders reiterated – Further instructions – Issued.
(G.O. Ms. No. 526, G. A. (Ser-C) Department , dated 19-08-2008)
Ref : – 1. G.O. Ms. No. 86, G. A. (Ser-C) Department , dated 08-03-1994.
2. G.O. Ms. No. 578, G. A. (Ser-C) Department , dated 31-12-1999.
Order: – In the G.O.s read above comprehensive instructions were issued on review of orders of suspension of Government employees at an interval of every six months and also to undertake specific review by the secretary to Government of the department at Government level when the employees are continued under suspension beyond two years, so as to consider such employees for reinstatement pending finalization of the disciplinary cases against them. It is brought to the notice of the government by the employees associations that the above orders inforce are not properly implemented and in several cases the employees are under suspension beyond two years and also the disciplinary cases are not concluded for several years.
2. After careful consideration, Government direct that, all concerned authorities to strictly implement the policy decision enunciated in the G.O.s read above. It is the responsibility of the competent authority to review each and every case of suspension as per the orders in-force and consider the reinstatement of the employees. The objective is to complete the disciplinary cases against the employees as expeditiously as possible and to punish the guilty. This is the specific policy of the Government for efficient and smooth functioning of the administration.
3. Accordingly, Government, hereby, direct that the employees who are under suspension for a period exceeding two years shall be reinstated pending finalization of the disciplinary cases/criminal cases against them. However, in exceptional cases, for example, where the charged Officers are not co-operating for completion of investigation / inquiry or when the inquiry / investigation could not be completed due to pendency of litigation, a Committee headed by the Secretary of the administrative Department, Head of the Department concerned and an Official from the Anti Corruption Bureau (where the cases are emanated from Anti Corruption Bureau investigation), shall review the orders of suspension against the employees who are continued under suspension well before completion of two years of suspension and take a decision to continue such employees under suspension beyond two years, duly recording the reasons for such a decision.
4. All the Departments of Secretariat, Heads of Departments and District Collectors should follow the above instructions scrupulously and bring it to the notice of all the concerned for strict implementation of the above orders.
Part – IV
Penalties And Disciplinary Authorities
9. Penalties: – The following penalties may, for good and sufficient reasons and as hereinafter provided, be imposed on a Government servant, namely-
Minor Penalties :
(i) censure;
(ii) withholding of promotion;
(v) (a) suspension, where a person has already been suspended under Rule 8 to the extent considered necessary;
Major Penalties :
(viii) compulsory retirement;
(ix) removal from service which shall not be a disqualification for future employment under the Government;
(x) dismissal from service which shall ordinarily be a disqualification for future employment under the Government :
Explanation : – The following shall not amount to a penalty within the meaning of this rule namely :
(i) non-promotion whether in a substantive or officiating capacity, of a Government servant in a class, category or grade of the service, after consideration of his case on merit, to a higher class, category or grade in the same Service to which he is eligible;
(ii) reversion of a Government servant from a department in which he is on deputation to his parent department or to a post not lower than the post on which he holds a lien or a suspended lien, for administrative reasons unconnected with his work or conduct;
(iii) replacement of the services of a Government servant, whose services had been borrowed from the Government of another State or Central Government or an authority under the control of the Government of another State or the Central Government or the authority from which the services of such Government servant had been borrowed;
(iv) stoppage or postponement of increment of a Government servant on account of extension of probation under Rule 26 in Part-II of the Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Services Rules;
(v) reversion of a Government Servant, appointed on probation to any other Service, grade or post, to his permanent Service, grade or post during or at the end of the period of probation in accordance with the terms of his appointment or the rules and orders governing such probation;
(vi) reversion of a Government Servant officiating in a higher service, grade or post to a lower service, grade or post, on the ground that he is considered to be unsuitable for such higher service, grade or post or on any administrative ground unconnected with his conduct;
(vii) withholding of increments pay of a Government Servant for his failure to pass any departmental examination in accordance with the rules or orders governing the service to which he belongs or post which he holds or the terms of his appointment;
(viii) termination of the services of a Government servant appointed on probation, during or at the end of the period of his probation, in accordance with the terms of his appointment or the rules and orders governing such probation;
(ix) discharge of a Government Servant engaged under contract, in accordance with the terms of his contract;
(x) discharge of a Government Servant appointed otherwise than under contract, to hold a temporary appointment, on the period of appointment;
(xi) compulsory retirement of a Government Servant in accordance with the provisions relating to his superannuation or retirement under sub-rules (2) and (2A) of Rule 3 of the Andhra Pradesh Liberalised Pension Rules, 1961 or under Rules 292, 293 and 293-A of the Hyderabad Civil Services Rules or under the Andhra Pradesh Government Servants Premature Retirement Rules, 1975 or under Article 465(2) or under Note 1 to Article 465-A of the Civil Services Regulations or in the case of members of the Civil Service of the erstwhile Hyderabad Government, compulsory retirement before completion of 30 years or 25 years of qualifying service according as the members of the service is governed by the Revised Pension Rules, 1951 or by the rules in force before that date, as the case may be, or the corresponding provisions thereof.
Executive Instructions
1. Imposing of penalty of reduction to the Lower Rank or Post.
(Memo. No. 928/63-3, dated 19-6-1963)
Ref: – Office Memo. No. 9/13/62, Estt. (D), dated 10-10-1962 from the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs.
Order: – Under Rule 8 of the Andhra Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules applicable to Andhra employees and under Rule 12 of Hyderabad Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, applicable to Telangana Employees, it has been provided that for good and sufficient reasons, one of the penalties to be imposed upon a Government servant is “reduction to a Lower Rank in the seniority list, or to a lower post or time scale, whether in the same service or in another service, State or Subordinate or to a lower stage in time-scale”. It has been decided that, in future, an order imposing the penalty of reduction to a lower service grade, or post or to a lower time-scale, should invariably specify :
(1) The period of reduction, under this, its clear intention is that the reduction should he permanent or for an indefinite period;
(2) Where the period of reduction is specified, whether on the expiry of the period, the Government servant is to be promoted automatically to the post from which he was reduced; and
(3) Whether on such re-promotion the Government servant will regain his original seniority in the higher service, grade or post, or higher time-scale which had been assigned to him prior to the imposition of the penalty.
2. Imposition of more than one penalty for a single lapse – Opinion of Law Department – Communicated.
(U.O. Note No. 1713/Ser. C/66-1, G.A.D., dated 1-7-1966)
A copy of the Law Department’s opinion on the above subject is forwarded to all Departments of Secretariat for information and guidance.
To
All Departments.
“true copy”
Civil Services – (Classification, Control & Appeal Rules) – Procedure To Be Followed In Cases Of Minor Penalties – Regarding
(Copy of Extract of Law Department’s opinion taken from the file bearing C.No. 3286/63-Ser. C of G.A. (Ser. C) Department, dated 25-2-64)
The scope of the expression “any of the penalties” occurring in Rules 12 and 14 of the Andhra C.C.A. Rules and in Rules 14 and 15 of the Hyderabad C.C.A. Rules cannot be cut down by understanding the same to mean as any one of the penalties. When a particular expression issued in a statute or statutory rule, it has to be presumed that the Legislature or the rule making authority, as the case may be, has used that expression in the sense in which it has been understood or interpreted by courts of law, unless a contrary intention appears from that statute or statutory rule. The word ‘any’ may have one of several meanings; according to the circumstances, may mean ‘all’, ‘each’, ‘every’, ‘some or one or more’ out of several vide the Law Lexicon by Ramantha Iyer. If the rule makers had intended that for any single lapse of which a Government servant has been found guilty in any disciplinary proceeding only one, but not more than one, of the several penalties specified in the CCA Rules should be imposed upon that Government servant that intention should have been brought out clearly in the relevant C.C.A. Rules. There is nothing in the Andhra C.C.A. Rules or the Hyderabad C.C.A. Rules from which such an intention can be gathered by implication, either.
It may, however, be pointed out that imposition of several penalties indiscriminately for a single lapse on the part of a Government servant could not have been contemplated by the rule making authority. The imposition of multifarious penalties for one and the same dereliction must not be made if the cumulative effect of those penalties is far out of proportion to the gravity of the dereliction. The imposition of a single major penalty may be more severe in its effect than the imposition of two or more minor penalties. In a case where a severe penalty is called for, it is open to the punishing authority to impose two or more less severe penalties instead of severe penalty, taking a lenient view of the magnitude of the delinquency. In a case where the delinquency on the part of a Government servant consists in, say, misappropriation of Government funds, the penalty of recovery from the pay of that Government servant of the loss caused to the Government may merely compensate the Government for the loss sustained by it, but that by itself may not be a sufficient punishment for the delinquency. In such a case, the punishing authority while ordering recovery of the loss caused to the Government, from the pay of the delinquent officer, may impose upon him some other penalty. While the former may be intended to compensate the Government, the latter may be intended to make the delinquent suffer the consequences of his misdemeanour. As the rules stand at present, there does not seem to be any objection to the imposition of some penalty, in addition to the recovery from pay of the loss caused to the Government, upon a Government servant who is found in disciplinary proceedings to have caused loss to the Government as a result of his negligence or misconduct.
3. Censure – Further Classification.
[G.O.Ms.No. 53, G.A.D. (Ser.C), dated 4-2-1997]
Ref: – 1. G.O.Ms. No. 187, G.A. (Ser.B), Department , dated 25-4-1985.
2. Memo.No. 322/Ser. B./87-6, GAD, dated 8-2-88.
Order: – According to sub-rule (i) of Rule 9 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991. “Censure” is declared as a minor penalty para 11 of the G.O. first read above provided that an individual, who is undergoing punishment, should not be recommended for promotion and where the period of punishment imposed is already over, each case has to be evaluated by Department Promotion Committee on merits. In the Government Memo. Second read above instructions were issued to the effect that solitary instance of minor punishment such as censure, fine, withholding of increments or recovery from pay of the pecuniary loss caused to the State Government or Central Government employee by itself does not automatically render a person unfit for promotion to a non selection post.
2. The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, in its instructions issued O.M.No. 39/21/56 Ests. (A) dated 13-12-1956 has clarified that an order of “Censure” is formal and public act intended to convey that the person concerned has been guilty of some blameworthy act or omission for which it has been found necessary to award him a formal punishment and nothing can amount to a censure unless it is intended to be such a formal punishment and imposed for good and sufficient reason after following the prescribed procedure and that a record of the punishment so imposed is kept on the officers confidential roll and the fact that he has been censured will have its bearing on the assessment of his merit or suitability for promotion to higher posts.
3. As the penalty of censure has a bearing on the Assessment of the Government Servant about his merit or suitability for promotion to higher posts and as the currency of punishment based on previous record stands as an impediment for promotion, it is considered necessary to specify the time limit during which the said penalty of “Censure” is effective besides defining the penalty.
4. Hitherto there are no specific orders in regard to definition of Censure and its implications. After careful consideration, the Government decided to issue the following orders in regard to definition of Censure and it’s implications in assessing the “merit” and suitability of the Government Servant for his promotion/ appointment by transfer.
Definition: – “Censure” is a formal and public act intended to convey that the person concerned has been guilty of some blameworthy act or omission for which it has been found necessary to a and him a formal Punishment, and nothing can amount to a “Censure” unless it is intended to be such a formal punishment and imposed for “good” and sufficient reason after following the prescribed procedure.
Effect: – Every censure awarded shall debar a Government Servant for promotion/ appointment by transfer for one year to both Selection and Non-Section Posts.
4. Disciplinary action in cases of misappropriation – Instructions.
(Memo. No. 3000/Services C/76-4. General Administrator (Services-C) Department , dated 28-6-1977)
Order: – According to Rule 8(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1963, the penalties specified in the said rule may be imposed on a member of a service for good and sufficient reason. The above rule also provides that the whole or any part of the pecuniary loss caused to the Government, etc., by negligence or breach of orders may be recovered from the pay of the person concerned.
2. Instructions were issued in confidential Memo No. 1718/Ser. C/75-1, General Administration (Services-C) Department, dated 22-11-75 that officers convicted in criminal cases should normally be dismissed from service and it is not necessary either to await the outcome of an appeal or the expiry of the appeal time.
3. Several cases of misappropriation by Government employees of Government money have come to the notice of the Government. In one case, the employee concerned encashed a fixed deposit receipt and instead of depositing the amount realised by him to the Government account, he absconded from duty. Action has been taken for the recovery of the amount from the employee. A criminal case has also been filed against him. In another case, seven drafts of the Reserve Bank of India, for a huge amount were reportedly encashed in a sub-treasury.
The certificates of payment disclosed that the drafts had been issued by the Reserve Bank of India, Madras, for payment at the sub-treasury to different parties. The matter was referred to the Reserve Bank of India, Madras. According to the particulars furnished by the Bank, except for the serial numbers of the drafts and the office of the issue, the particulars of the amounts, the dates of issue, the names of the parties and the place of the payment were different from the particulars of drafts stated to have been encashed in the sub-treasury. The investigating officer observed, inter-alia, that the sub-treasury officer in connivance with his subordinate staff made some fictitious entries in the sub-treasury records and managed to withdraw the amount in two instalments. The sub-treasury officer and the staff of the sub-treasury had been placed under suspension and the case is pending trial in the Court.
4. It was observed by the Public Accounts Committee that there is a wide discrepancy in the scales of punishment meted out in misappropriation cases as stated in the above para. The question of prescribing uniform scale of punishment in such cases has been considered by the Government. It has been decided that ordinarily cases of proved misappropriation would justify dismissal from service and action should accordingly be taken. There may, however, be rare cases where attendant circumstances, such as trivial amount, short duration, immediate payment on detection, all of which may raise a presumption that it was an error in accounting, which may justify a different punishment. A clear distinction should be drawn between the cases of “delayed remittance” and “misappropriation” having regard to the fact that in proved cases of misappropriation no punishment short of dismissal is normally justified and accordingly the case of ‘delayed remittance’ need not always be classified for the purpose of audit as a case of misappropriation.
5. Minor Penalties – Effect of Penalty – Orders – Issued
[G.O.Ms.No. 342, General Administrator (Ser.-C) Department , dated 4-8-1997]
Ref: – 1. G.O.Ms.No. 187, General Administrator (Ser.B) Department , dated 25-4-1985.
2. G.O.Ms.No. 58, General Administrator (Ser.C) Department , dated 4-2-1997.
Order: – Under Rule 9 of Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1991, the following are the minor penalties :
(i) Censure
(ii) Withholding of Promotion
(iii) Recovery from pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused by him to the State Government or the Central government or to a Local Authority or to a Corporation owned or controlled by the State or the Central Government by negligence or breach of orders, while working in any department of the State or the Central Government, Local Authority or Corporation concerned.
(iv) Withholding of increments of pay.
(v) Suspension, where a person has already been suspended under Rule 8 to the extent considered necessary.
2. As per para 11 of G.O.Ms.No. 187, General Administration (Services B) Department, dated 25-4-1985 the individual who is undergoing punishment should not be recommended for promotion. In case, where the period of punishment imposed is already over, each case has to be evaluated by Departmental Promotion Committee on merits.
3. The need for issue of comprehensive instructions on the currency and effect of minor penalties on Government employees who were involved in disciplinary cases and who come up for consideration for vomotion to higher categories has been examined and further instructions are issued as follows :
4. All Departments of Secretariat/Heads of Departments/all District Collectors shall follow the above orders scrupulously and bring it to the notice of all concerned.
4. All Departments of Secretariat/Heads of Departments/all District Collectors shall follow the above orders scrupulously and bring it to the notice of all concerned.
It's interesting that many of the bloggers to helped clarify a few things for me as well as giving.Most of ideas can be nice content.The people to give them a good shake to get your point and across the command.
ReplyDeleteeSignature