Assigned task of vigilance matters, many CVOs, DVOs in J&K UT facing ACB cases

CVC guidelines completely ignored while making appointments

All Admn Secys asked to  obtain clearance from GAD

Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, July 2: Shocking it may sound but it is a fact that several Chief Vigilance Officers/Departmental Vigilance Officers in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir are themselves facing Anti-Corruption Bureau cases and this has raised a big question mark on the much-hyped drive of the Government to fight the menace of corruption.
This is mainly because no serious attention was paid towards the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) guidelines while appointing Chief Vigilance Officers (CVOs) and Departmental Vigilance Officers (DVOs) by different Government departments.
Official sources told EXCELSIOR that in order to make the institution of Chief Vigilance Officers/Departmental Vigilance Officers more effective, instructions were issued from time to time for appointment of such officers in the departments, who are required to function in close coordination with the Anti-Corruption Bureau.
Moreover, they are required to take immediate cognizance of the cases alleging misuse of authority or indulging in acts of omissions and commissions by the Government servants either through Anti-Corruption Bureau or otherwise.
Further, to keep the mechanism of CVOs/DVOs actively functioning, relating to vigilance administration in the Government departments, an online “Satark Nagrik App and DVO portal” was recently launched by the Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha and data of all the CVOs and DVOs has been updated on this portal.
They are supposed to communicate with the Anti-Corruption Bureau through this communication channel and for effective vigilance administration they have also been apprised about the working of portal through webinars organized recently by the ACB.
However, while analysing the data of CVOs and DVOs recently, the Anti-Corruption Bureau came to know that several such officers are having vigilance cases registered against them.
Accordingly, the Anti-Corruption Bureau has brought these startling revelations to the notice of the Government mentioning that “this is not a healthy practice”. It has requested that vigilance clearance in respect of the officers may be obtained by the Administrative Departments prior to their appointments as CVOs/DVOs.
Now, the General Administration Department, which has administrative control over the Bureau, has taken serious note of the same, sources informed, adding “the General Administration Department has admitted that the institution of DVOs/CVOs, which has been given the mandate of dealing with vigilance matters in the respective departments in a fair and transparent manner, should be fair enough and the officers so appointed should also be not involved in any ACB case”.
“Such a practice would have a negative impact on the functioning of the institutions and also impede the trust on these institutions and as such the CVOs and DVOs need to be clear from vigilance angle”, the GAD has mentioned in a communication addressed to all the Administrative Secretaries, the copy of which is available with EXCELSIOR.
Accordingly, the General Administration Department has decided that vigilance clearance of the officers should be obtained by the concerned Administrative Departments from the GAD prior to their appointment as CVOs/DVOs. All the Administrative Secretaries have been directed to strictly adhere to these instructions.
In its edition dated January 25, 2021, EXCELSIOR had exclusively reported that Government of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir has yet not started acting on the explicit guidelines/rules of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) regarding strengthening of internal vigilance in the Departments and Corporations.
It was also mentioned in the report that neither the vital information about the Departmental Vigilance Officers (DVOs) is available in the public domain nor any proper format devised to review their performance despite the fact that they are considered as extended hands of the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in fight against the menace of corruption.
The CVC guidelines clearly state that CVOs and DVOs should be of a proven integrity and the officer to be given additional charge of the post of DVO/CVO should not be one whose normal duties involve dealing with matters sensitive from vigilance point of view like recruitment and purchase etc.
“How officers who are already facing ACB cases can extend help to the Government or the Anti-Corruption Bureau in fight against the menace of corruption remains a million dollar question”, sources said, adding “had CVC guidelines been strictly acted upon such appointments would not have been made”.