Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Nov 5: In the much publicized petition highlighting alleged 37 backdoor appointments by three ex-Speakers of Legislative Assembly, Justice Tashi Rabstan today expressed concern over the slackness on the part of State Vigilance Organization (SVO) and sought Action Taken Report (ATR) indicating the steps taken after July 6, 2015 when the status report establishing recruitment scam was filed in the High Court.
In its status report filed on July 6, 2015, the State Vigilance Organization has established that 37 illegal/backdoor appointments were made by three former Speakers of J&K Legislative Assembly. It has specifically been mentioned in the report that 28 appointments were made by Mohd Akbar Lone, 5 by Tara Chand and 4 by Mubarak Gul.
When the petition came up for hearing, Advocate Sheikh Shakeel Ahmed appearing for the petitioner Prof S K Bhalla drew the attention of the court to the detailed order passed by the State High Court on April, 16, 2015 when the court had disagreed with the closure report of the SVO and had formulated two points for preliminary enquiry into the matter particularly to ascertain as to the manner in which each one of the 37 posts were filled up and whether the posts were filled up as per the procedure prescribed under applicable rules.
“Pursuant to this order, the State Vigilance Organization filed a detailed status report on July 6, 2015 wherein the SVO established that the three former Speakers namely Mohd Akbar Lone, Tara Chand and Mubarak Gul resorted to illegal/backdoor appointments of 37 persons against various newly created vacancies in the Legislative Assembly Secretariat”, he said, adding “there is no headway in the matter after July 6, 2015 and the matter is gathering dust in the SVO as the accused in the scam are highly influential political personalities of the State and the SVO is under pressure not to proceed against the big fish”.
Advocate Ahmed further submitted that as per the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act read with Criminal Procedure Code and Vigilance Manual the SVO should have immediately lodged an FIR under Section 5(2) Prevention of Corruption Act against the high profile accused but for no valid reasons the matter was kept pending on the plea that the court is seized of the matter.
“The SVO owes an explanation to the court as to what steps were taken in the matter particularly when the preliminary enquiry was completed in July 2015 establishing prima facie an employment racket in the Assembly Secretariat”, he further said and referred a Constitution Bench Judgment of the Supreme Court dated November, 12, 2013 titled Lalita Kumar V/s Govt. of UP & Ors wherein the Apex Court has held that in a corruption case the preliminary enquiry should not exceed seven days and after the completion of enquiry there should be no delay in lodging FIR when the allegations establish commission of a cognizable offence.
He further submitted that the Apex Court has also held that action should be taken against those police officers who do not register FIR particularly when the complaint discloses commission of a cognizable offence. “Preliminary enquiry was completed in first week of July 2015 and almost four months have elapsed and the SVO did not move further solely for the reason that the accused are former Speakers and enjoy political patronage”, he added.
After considering the submissions of Advocate Ahmed, Justice Tashi Rabstan, in the open court, pulled up State Vigilance Organization and put a specific query to AAG PC Sharma as to what action was initiated by the SVO after filing the status report on July 6, 2015.
AAG submitted that the SVO will proceed strictly as per Vigilance Manual and will place the action taken before the court. Upon this, Justice Tashi Rabstan directed AAG PC Sharma appearing for State Vigilance Organization to file Action Taken Report (ATR) indicating the steps taken by the SVO particularly after July 6, 2015 when status report establishing recruitment scam in Legislative Assembly was filed in the State High Court.