file picture
Because their criminal cases are pending, it has disapproved of the practice of allowing corrupt govt servants to continue in service merely. Because the criminal case is pending, and thereby permitting such delinquent officers to continue in service and receive benefits, the very purpose of the conduct rules would be defeated, directing the govt to amend Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and the relevant conduct rules by incorporating govt orders (GOs) and court rulings that permit simultaneous conduct of disciplinary and criminal proceedings against delinquent govt servants, Justice Pugalendhi said: “By keeping the disciplinary proceedings in abeyance merely. Madurai: Reminding the present Tamil Nadu govt of its stated ‘zero tolerance’ towards corruption, Madras high court has ordered that disciplinary proceedings initiated against errant govt employees should be completed within six months. “The present govt claims that it has zero tolerance for corruption and is committed to a corruption-free society. If govt servants who are violating the conduct rules and engaging in corrupt practices are dealt with in a prompt manner, then it would send a strong message against corruption and also discourage other officers from committing such acts,” observed Justice B Pugalendhi. Such an approach on the part of the govt would neither serve the interest of the administration nor promote efficiency in public service. On the contrary, it would have the effect of enabling delinquent officers to avoid or delay the consequences of their misconduct.”
The court was hearing a batch of petitions filed by govt servants against whom criminal cases were filed under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, based on traps conducted by DVAC. Therefore, they were placed under suspension, as per Rule 17(2)(e) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules.
“The court is unable to understand as to how the disciplinary authority can take a call on whether the disciplinary proceedings can be kept in abeyance, when the decisions of the Supreme Court have consistently made it clear that there is no legal bar for simultaneous disciplinary proceedings during the pendency of criminal cases,” said Justice Pugalendhi. “It is made clear that failure to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, as directed above, would lead to a presumption that the disciplinary authorities are aiding the delinquent officers to escape from punishment, and may warrant initiation of appropriate disciplinary proceedings against such authorities as well,” the judge observed and disposed of the petitions. The judge observed, “When the entry of a person with criminal antecedents into govt service is considered to have a bearing on the purity of administration, the involvement of a serving govt servant in a criminal case, particularly a corruption case arising out of the discharge of official duties, cannot be viewed with any lesser seriousness. In fact, the continued presence of such a person in service, without timely departmental action, has a direct bearing on the purity, functioning and reputation of the administration. Allowing such cases to remain pending for years would defeat the very purpose for which standards of integrity and conduct are prescribed for govt servants. The petitioners filed petitions challenging their suspension orders saying they were under suspension for a prolonged period and that disciplinary inquiry has not been conducted against them.