A Rly Employee Who Was
Nailed For Telling The Truth,
Finally CVC Came To His Rescue..
Bangalore : Shri V. Nandakumar who is working as Ticket Inspector in South Western Railway had lodged a complaint before CBI anti corruption bureau against one of his superior Shri O. Rajappa (who was working as a chief Ticket Inspector (CTI) and was subsequently promoted as Assistant Commercial Manager (ACM) and posted to Bangalore Division of South Western Railway), was demanding money to forward his TA bills and to sanction leave. Who was also indulging in certain corrupt practices who was running illegal business agency in which his wife was an agent & was promoting the business agency for his personal gains without obtaining proper sanction from the competent authority in clear violation to the Railway Service Conduct Rules.
Shri Nandakumar who was a poor group ‘C’ reserve catagary employee was harassed on one pretext or the other, for the only fault that he did not take up the policy which was promoted by Shri Rajappa in which his wife was an agent. Shri Nandakumar decided to lodge a complaint before CBI anti corruption bureau. On 16.09.2003 Shri Rajappa was trapped red handed by CBI while accepting bribe. A case was registered under Sec.7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and was arrested & was enlarged on bail by Hon'ble CBI special court, Bangalore.
Though the complainant was immune under the informers protection Act, based on a perverted report by the prosecution agency a major departmental proceedings was initiated against Shri Nandakumar by the departmental authorities without application of mind & a major charge sheet was issued without substance, enough ingredients causing him severe mental agony. Further added to the fuel there was an abnormal delay in finalization of the departmental proceedings causing him a social stigma, delay in promotion & delay in monitory benefits. Even his basic requirements for access to the documents to defend his case were denied by the departmental authorities causing him untold misery to prove his innocence in the course of inquiry. The inquiry was not finalized within a stipulated time frame as per extant rules fixed by the Railway Board. With all these hurdles Shri Nandakumar (The complainant) ran from pillar to post to prove his innocence, but the departmental authorities where indifferent towards him for the only reason that he had lodged a complaint against his superior authority and the complainant was a poor group ‘C’ employee.
The accused Shri Rajappa was not even placed under suspension subsequent to his arrest by the CBI authorities, as he was in high & mighty position and was having clout with big wigs. Also the accused was promoted to a gazetted post and was posted to work in the same place. And exerted enormous pressure on the inquiry authority to give a perverse finding where the complainant was charge sheeted on the ground that he had filed a false complaint against Shri Rajappa. The inquiry authority not only succumbed to the pressure of the accused Shri Rajappa, but also conducted the inquiry in the biased manner and denied him in providing the basic requirement for the access of documents denying him the reasonable opportunity and further went ahead & gave a perverted report saying that charges against Shri Nandakumar was proved and had misled the Railway Administration.
In the meanwhile Shri Nandakumar left with no other option, approached the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) in the year 2007 to drop the charges against complainant & to take up the matter against the accused Shri Rajappa armed with the information obtained under RTI. Even where he had to face the wrath of the higher departmental authorities who not only failed to provide the information under RTI but threatened him with dire consequences for approaching Information Commission, New Delhi and where the departmental Public Information officer who refused to divulge with the information that was sought by Shri Nandakumar was penalized by the Central Information Commission (CIC) and was further directed to provide the information to the applicant (Shri Nandakumar) and imposed a penalty of Rs.5000 on the erring departmental official who not only failed to provide the information but also who had threatened the applicant Shri Nandakumar for seeking information under RTI.
Finally during the year 2010, though justice was delayed, justice was not denied. The CVC after detailed investigation came to the rescue of Shri Nandakumar (Complainant) by advising the Railway Authorities to drop the charges in its letter dated 07.06.2010 to Advisor vigilance, Railway Board the CVC has stated that Shri Rajappa had misused his official position in an explicit & biased manner with clear motive of repeatedly harassing his subordinate Shri Nandakumar. Further it had also stated in fact Shri Rajappa has taken the bribe also. The CVC has advised a major penalty against Shri Rajappa (The accused) and the penalty proceedings that was initiated against Shri Nandakumar (the complainant) to be dropped. Now major penalty proceedings have been initiated against Shri Rajappa, the accused, who is bringing severe pressure on Shri Nandakumar not to depose before the inquiry authority as he is in the same zone South Western Railway.
Now the million dollar question is:-
1. Who is responsible (RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION) for the mess which had costed the government exchequer an enormous amount towards the inquiry against Shri Nandakumar which dragged for several years & finally dropped at the intervention of CVC?
2. Who is accountable for (DICIPLINARY AUTHORITY, INQUIRY AUTHORITY) victimizing Shri Nandakumar who was framed charges, without application of mind at the behest of somebody?
3. The inquiry authority who gave perverse report against Shri Nandakumar saying that the charges against him are proved & who misled the Railway Administration for causing severe mental agony, social stigma, delay in promotion, delay in monitory benefits?
4. Who will pay the damages/compensation for victimization of a reserve catagary (Dalit) employee for speaking the truth and suffering at the hands of public servant which is an offence under the Prevention of Atrocities Act [Sec.3 (2)]?
5. Who is responsible for False, malicious or vexatious legal departmental proceedings which was initiated against Shri Nandakumar, a poor Group ‘C’ employee which tantamount to offence under the Prevention of Atrocities Act [Sec. 3 (1)(viii)]?
Source : My Blog Just another WordPress.com site
No comments:
Post a Comment