Dear Comrades,
No. 420/01/2012-AVD-IV
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel,
Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of
Personnel & Training
North Block, New
Delhi-110001.
Dated the 20th July,
2012.
OFFICE-MEMORANDUM
Subject: Guidelines for checking delays in grant of sanction of prosecution — strict
compliance thereof.
Attention is invited
to this Department's O.M. Nos. 399/33/2006-AVD.III dated 06.11.2006 &
20.12.2006 and O.M. No. 372/19/2012-AVD.III dated 03.05.2012 on the subject
cited above.
2.
In a recent meeting taken by Secretary (Personnel) to review the cases for sanction
of prosecution against public servants pending with various Ministries / Departments,
the following issues emerged:-
(a) It was noted that in a significant no.
of cases pertaining to banks and PSUs etc., the Disciplinary Authorities first
decline the sanction and thereafter seek advice of CVC. This is in clear
violation of DOP&T's instructions issued vide O.M. 399/33/2006-AVD.III
dated 06.11.2006 wherein it is stipulated that the competent authority shall
take a tentative view regarding the action to be taken and seek advice of CVC
in the matter and on receipt of the advice from the CVC, the concerned Ministry
/ Department shall finalise its views. It is reiterated that before passing
orders on requests for sanction for prosecution, the instructions issued by
this Department are strictly adhered to.
(b) It was also noticed that various
Ministries / Departments do not adhere to the stipulated time limit. It is
imperative that the stipulated time limit must be strictly adhered to. The
guidelines issued by DOPT vide O.M. No. 399/33/2006-AVD-III dated 06.11.2006
& 20.12.2006, have recently been modified vide O.M. No. 372/19/2012-AVD.III
dated 03.05,2012 to empower the disciplinary authority to take final view in
such matters within three months and that in disagreement cases DOPT's advice
would be taken into account before passing final orders.
(c) Protracted correspondence made by
the Administrative Ministries with the CBI/CVC for
clarifications/reconsideration, etc. are strictly not necessary and
disciplinary authority can, in most cases, take a decision on the basis of records
which are available with it. As per the extant instructions, the Disciplinary
Authority should not entertain representations from individuals themselves as
this would be an endless process which often delays the matter and results in
non-adherence to the prescribed time lines for processing such cases. This
Department's instruction dated 6th November, 2006 has clearly stated that the
concerned Ministry/Department shall refer the case to CVC for reconsideration
only in exceptional cases when new facts come to light.
(d) The administrative Departments
should avoid making repeated references to the CVC for reconsideration of their
advice and, in all cases where they propose to disagree with the advice given
by CVC, the matter should be promptly referred to the DoP&T (as a
disagreement case), seeking DoP&T's views in the matter.
(e) Wherever, the disagreement cases are
referred to DoP&T for views/ advice and once DoP&T gives its views, the
Disciplinary Authority may have to take a considered final decision, keeping in
view the advice given by DoP&T. The instructions contained in this
Department's O.Ms dated 06.11.2006 and 20.12.2006, as modified O.M. dated
03.05.2012 in this regard shall be compiled with strictly by all
Ministries/Departments.
Sd/-
(V.M. Rathnam)
Deputy Secretary(V-IV)
Tel.No. 23094637
