Neeraj Rohmetra
JAMMU, Sept 12: Governor, N NVohra has returned the proposals of the Chief Minister – led selection panel for appointment of members to two important statutory bodies – the State Vigilance Commission (SVC) and State Information Commission (SIC) and raised serious questions over the entire selection process.
Official sources told EXCELSIOR, “Raj Bhavan has expressed its displeasure over the manner in which both the proposals were being pushed by the State Government, without doing proper ground-work and in both the proposals, persons who failed to comply with the provisions of the SVC and SIC rules had been recommended”, adding, “in both cases, vital information pertainingto the candidates hadn’t been shared with the Governor thereby putting question mark over the entire process”.
“What is particularly intriguing that the recommendations had been made by the selection panel headed by Chief Minister, Mehbooba Mufti and comprised former Chief Minister, Omar Abdullah, who is leader of largest opposition party in the State. Even the panel was also perhaps not apprised of the full credentials of the candidates, whose names were proposed for the two institutions”, sources asserted.
Elaborating over the queries submitted by Raj Bhavan pertaining to the State Vigilance Commission proposal, sources said, “the panel has recommended the name of P L Gupta for the post of Chief Vigilance Commissioner (CVC), but there are issues pertaining to his tenure and eligibility”.
“As per the provision of the Jammu and Kashmir State Vigilance Commission (Amendment) Act, 2011, person being appointed as CVC should have a tenure of three years before attaining superannuation at the age of 65. However, Gupta’s age was 62 years and 12 days, when the selection panel had recommended his name for the post”, sources said.
Sources further added, “there were serious allegations against R S Jasrotia, an IFS officer, whose name hadbeen recommended by the panel for the post of Vigilance Commissioner (VC). The officer was facing an inquiry for manipulation of his own Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) for 1988-89 and 1989-90”.
Sources said, “Raj Bhavan has sought the exact details of the charge sheet and the inquiry report against Jasrotia and also wanted to know how such a serious inquiry had been closed down on some technical grounds”.
“Even the Supreme Court on September 5, this year while hearing a petition filed in 2015 challenging the appointment of the incumbent CVC, K V Chaudhary, and Vigilance Commissioner (VC) T M Bhasin by the Central Government had categorically stated that person appointed to the posts of Central Vigilance Commissioner and Vigilance Commissioners should meet the criteria of having “impeccable integrity”. The recommendations made by the State panel are likely to be reviewed by the Governor, keeping in mind these directions from the Apex Court”, sources categorically stated.
While referring to the recommendations made for appointment of two Information Commissioners, sources said, “there were allegations of land grabbing against Ashok Kumar Atri, who had attained superannuation as Deputy Inspector General of Police, Rajouri-Poonch Range in 2015”. They added “Raj Bhavan was also annoyed over the fact that even the CID Department hadn’t shared vital information about the candidates and matter came to fore only several complaints pertaining to these recommendations reached the Governor”.
Elaborating further, sources said, “documentsin possession of Raj Bhavan indicated that the police officer had encroached nearly 24 kanals of State land during his service tenure and even some land near his residence in Channi Himmat colony. Revenue records also indicated that mutations pertaining to some of the land in his possession had also been fudged and this had been established during an inquiry”.
Source further pointed out, “the panel had also recommended the name of Mohammad Ashraf Mir, Commissioner Secretary, Revenue for the post of Information Commissioner despite the fact that he has not tendered his resignation from his service yet and will be superannuating on January 31, next year”.
Chapter III of the Right to Information Act, 2009, while elaborating on the appointment of Chief Information Commissioner and Information Commissioners (IC) categorically state that the individuals can’t hold any other office of profit or pursue any other profession.
Sources in the General Administration Department (GAD), while corroborating the return of both panels said, “the State Government is likely to send reply to the Governor on both issues within few days”.
Asked about the expected response by the State Government, sources said, “Mohammad Ashraf Mir was likely to resign from his present post to pave way for his appointment as IC”, adding, “the State Government was also likely to push for appointment of P L Gupta as CVC and will also submit detailed charge sheet, inquiry report in case of Jasrotia”.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel