Minister
of State in the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and
Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office. (SHRI V. NARAYANASAMY)
(a) to (d): A Statement is laid on the Table
of the House.
The Said Statement is detailed
below:
(a) & (b): The Supreme Court of India, vide
its judgment dated 18th December, 1997 in the case of Vineet Narain Vs.
Union of India, directed that “time limit of three months for grant of
sanction for prosecution must be strictly adhered to. However, additional
time of one month may be allowed where consultation is
required with the Attorney General (AG)
or any Law Officer in the AG’s office”.
The delay which occurs in the sanctioning of
prosecution is mostly on account of detailed scrutiny and analysis of
voluminous case records and evidence, consultation with Central
Vigilance Commission (CVC), State Governments and other agencies, and
sometimes non-availability of relevant documentary evidence.
However, in order to check delays
in grant of sanction for prosecution, the Department of Personnel
& Training has already issued guidelines vide its OM
No.399/33/2006-AVD-III dated 6th November, 2006 followed by another OM
dated 20th December, 2006, providing for a definite time frame at each
stage for handling of requests from CBI for prosecution of public servants.
The Group of Ministers (GoM) on tackling
corruption, in its first report, had also given certain recommendations for
speedy disposal of requests for sanction of prosecution of public servants,
which included – taking decision on such cases within 3 months; monitoring
of such cases at the level of Secretary of the Ministry/Department and submission
of report to the Cabinet Secretary; and in cases of refusal to accord
sanction, submission of a report to the next higher authority within 7 days
for information (where competent authority is
Minister, such report is to be submitted to the Prime Minister). The said
recommendation of the GoM has been accepted by Government and instructions
have been issued by the Government on 3rd May, 2012.
The GoM has also recommended that
(a) requests for prior approval under section 6A of the Delhi Special
Police Establishment Act, 1946 shall be decided by the competent authority
within three months of receipt of request; (b) the competent authority will
give a Speaking Order, giving reasons for its decisions; and (c) in the
event a decision is taken to refuse permission, the reasons thereof shall
also be put up to the next higher authority (Prime Minister)
for information within one week of taking the decision. The
recommendation of the GOM has been accepted and orders have been issued by
DoP&T on 26th September, 2011.
(c) & (d): A Group of Officers (GoO) was
constituted to take a view on complaints against Chief Executives and
Functional Directors of Public Sector Enterprises (PSEs) and Chairman
and Managing Directors (CMDs) and Functional Directors
of Public Sector banks and Financial Institutions
vide Department of Public Enterprises O.M. No. 15(1)/2010-DPE(GM)
dated 11.3.2010 and 11.05.2011 under the chairmanship of Secretary
(Coordination and Public Grievance), Cabinet Secretariat, which has
received complaints against CMDs of several PSU. The list containing the
names of CMDs of PSUs against whom complaints have been received is at
Annexure.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment