ASHOK KHEMKA IAS

sc-responds-khemka-fails-to-understand-the-essence-of-rules

SC responds: Khemka fails to understand the essence of rules

The Supreme Court of India has taught a lesson to senior IAS officer Ashok Khema in the Haryana government about court proceedings. The SC observed that it appears Khemka gives precedence to his ego over court rules and demanding reforms in this for his own convenience.

The court stated that neither rules are made for a section nor any particular section is given any concession. A rule is good when it serves people as such and is in the welfare of the common man. Khemka sought permission to argue the matter in the court himself by saying that IAS officers who run the administration across the country, can’t they help the court by arguing in the Supreme Court. He also challenged the Supreme Court Rule (Order 4, Rule 1).

Actually one has to undergo certain processes before he is allowed to argue in SC. Application of the petitioner is accepted only after it is served to the competent authority which in case of Khemka is the Haryana government. The application of Khemka was rejected on the ground that the Intervention Application (IA) was not served to the petitioner. After that Khemka wrote a letter to the SC.

The court in its three-page letter says that Khemka considers himself wise and competent but failed to understand the logic behind Order 4 Rule 1. Registrar gives its opinion under this that if anyone can help by arguing to settle the case. These rules don’t question anyone’s competence and knowledge. It is not necessary that a doctor, engineer, and administrator are able to help the court as a lawyer does.

Under Order 4, Rule 1 a person has to tell the court why he does not want to take the help of a lawyer. The application goes to Registrar who interviews and sends his report to the court if the person is competent or not or there is a need to appoint Amicus Curiae.

15 Jul 2020
khemka-wants-9-5-ratings-instead-of-9-writes-to-cji-against-denial-for-a-reply-as-propria-persona-

Khemka wants 9.5 ratings instead of 9: Writes to CJI against denial for a reply as 'propria persona'

Senior IAS officer Ashok Khemka (IAS:1991:HY) is aggrieved with the way Supreme Court Registrar office has treated his successive applications denying him to file a reply as propria persona (party in person). His representation was summarily rejected by the Assistant Registrar (communication dated March 18, 2020) asking him to "take necessary steps as per the provisions of Supreme Court Rules, 2013". Khemka has finally written to the CJI S A Bobde seeking clarifications on the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

In fact, Khemka is unhappy over the Personal Appraisal Report (PAR) written by Haryana Chief Minister M L Khattar who gave him 9 ratings against his reporting minister Anil Vij who gave him 9.5. As per DOPT rules, 9 also is considered ‘excellent’ on rating parameters. Khemka in 2019 challenged it in the Haryana and Punjab High Court (P&H HC) which expunged adverse remarks made by Khattar in his Personal Appraisal Report (PAR).

In response, the Haryana Government filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court (SC) challenging the March 2019 judgment of the P&H HC.

On receiving notice on the SLP, Khemka dispatched his reply to SC along with an application to appear ‘propria persona’ through registered post. Khemka wrote that he was following the same practice which he had adopted earlier in another SLP in 2018. He highlighted that the SC Registry had in 2018 interviewed him and found him fit to present the case himself whereas contrary to such precedent it was rejected in 2020.  

It is said that there were few modifications in concerned rules/provisions during the tenure of the then CJI Ranjan Gogoi which perhaps lead to the rejection of Khemka's applications to appear ‘propria persona’.

Those in the know of the affairs raise questions as to why Khemka needed to waste his precious time and resources if Khattar’s PAR too rated him ‘excellent’ (i.e. 9 ratings). Neither it may affect his promotion, empanelment, salary and perks, pension or even his VRS prospects. Including those ones who admire whistleblower officer Khemka for his integrity says that even though it is one’s fundamental right to move to the SC one should not forget the difference between a choice, compulsion, legal relief, and luxury.

ALSO REDAD:

Khemka wants 9.5 ratings instead of 9: Writes to CJI against denial for a reply as 'propria persona'

13 Jul 2020
sc-responds-khemka-fails-to-understand-the-essence-of-rules

SC responds: Khemka fails to understand the essence of rules

By IndianMandarins 15 Jul 2020

The Supreme Court of India has taught a lesson to senior IAS officer Ashok Khema in the Haryana government about court proceedings. The SC observed that it appears Khemka gives precedence to his ego over court rules and demanding reforms in this for his own convenience.

The court stated that neither rules are made for a section nor any particular section is given any concession. A rule is good when it serves people as such and is in the welfare of the common man. Khemka sought permission to argue the matter in the court himself by saying that IAS officers who run the administration across the country, can’t they help the court by arguing in the Supreme Court. He also challenged the Supreme Court Rule (Order 4, Rule 1).

Actually one has to undergo certain processes before he is allowed to argue in SC. Application of the petitioner is accepted only after it is served to the competent authority which in case of Khemka is the Haryana government. The application of Khemka was rejected on the ground that the Intervention Application (IA) was not served to the petitioner. After that Khemka wrote a letter to the SC.

The court in its three-page letter says that Khemka considers himself wise and competent but failed to understand the logic behind Order 4 Rule 1. Registrar gives its opinion under this that if anyone can help by arguing to settle the case. These rules don’t question anyone’s competence and knowledge. It is not necessary that a doctor, engineer, and administrator are able to help the court as a lawyer does.

Under Order 4, Rule 1 a person has to tell the court why he does not want to take the help of a lawyer. The application goes to Registrar who interviews and sends his report to the court if the person is competent or not or there is a need to appoint Amicus Curiae.

khemka-wants-9-5-ratings-instead-of-9-writes-to-cji-against-denial-for-a-reply-as-propria-persona-

Khemka wants 9.5 ratings instead of 9: Writes to CJI against denial for a reply as 'propria persona'

By IndianMandarins 13 Jul 2020

Senior IAS officer Ashok Khemka (IAS:1991:HY) is aggrieved with the way Supreme Court Registrar office has treated his successive applications denying him to file a reply as propria persona (party in person). His representation was summarily rejected by the Assistant Registrar (communication dated March 18, 2020) asking him to "take necessary steps as per the provisions of Supreme Court Rules, 2013". Khemka has finally written to the CJI S A Bobde seeking clarifications on the Supreme Court Rules, 2013.

In fact, Khemka is unhappy over the Personal Appraisal Report (PAR) written by Haryana Chief Minister M L Khattar who gave him 9 ratings against his reporting minister Anil Vij who gave him 9.5. As per DOPT rules, 9 also is considered ‘excellent’ on rating parameters. Khemka in 2019 challenged it in the Haryana and Punjab High Court (P&H HC) which expunged adverse remarks made by Khattar in his Personal Appraisal Report (PAR).

In response, the Haryana Government filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court (SC) challenging the March 2019 judgment of the P&H HC.

On receiving notice on the SLP, Khemka dispatched his reply to SC along with an application to appear ‘propria persona’ through registered post. Khemka wrote that he was following the same practice which he had adopted earlier in another SLP in 2018. He highlighted that the SC Registry had in 2018 interviewed him and found him fit to present the case himself whereas contrary to such precedent it was rejected in 2020.  

It is said that there were few modifications in concerned rules/provisions during the tenure of the then CJI Ranjan Gogoi which perhaps lead to the rejection of Khemka's applications to appear ‘propria persona’.

Those in the know of the affairs raise questions as to why Khemka needed to waste his precious time and resources if Khattar’s PAR too rated him ‘excellent’ (i.e. 9 ratings). Neither it may affect his promotion, empanelment, salary and perks, pension or even his VRS prospects. Including those ones who admire whistleblower officer Khemka for his integrity says that even though it is one’s fundamental right to move to the SC one should not forget the difference between a choice, compulsion, legal relief, and luxury.

ALSO REDAD:

Khemka wants 9.5 ratings instead of 9: Writes to CJI against denial for a reply as 'propria persona'

khemka-moves-to-cat-against-non-empanelment-

Khemka moves to CAT against non-empanelment?

By IndianMandarins 22 Nov 2019

If some key sources are to be believed 1991 batch Haryana cadre IAS officer Ashok Khemka has moved to Haryana Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) against his non-empanelment as Additional Secretary in Govt of India.

It may be underlined that NaMo administration had on 09 October 2019 cleared the empanelment of 31 IAS officers belonging to 1991 batch to hold Additional Secretary/AS Equivalent post in Govt of India. Usually, the review of empanelment of a batch is considered along with empanelment of immediate junior batch. 

Those in the know of the affairs say that Khemka too would have been waiting to find his name on the review list expected along with the empanelment list of 1992 batch of IAS officers which was cleared last Monday. Cases of review of 1991 batch was not taken up along with 1992 batch empanelment which would have prompted Khemka to move to CAT.  

khemka's-latest-tweet-might-have-ruffled-a-lot-of-feathers

Khemka's latest tweet might have ruffled a lot of feathers

By IndianMandarins 23 Jul 2019

Ashok Khemka, IAS, has earned the respect of his colleagues and gratitude of his fellow citizens for being what he is: absolutely steadfast in stain-free public service. So when he says something it's always taken seriously. Though there is no dearth of bureaucrats who criticise him; sometimes convincingly. 

His latest tweet says: "Who tolerates corruption?  A weak and corrupt mind. Such a person may increase his own well being but does not contribute in nation-building. The duty of a true leader is to be intolerant of corruption and to identify and eliminate all those who advise otherwise."

This tweet has triggered a set of whispers in the power corridors. One interpretation is that his Maharshi Vidura-like sage advice is meant for the political leadership who projects itself is fighting corruption but is, in reality, being swayed by the wheeler-dealers of the system. Another is that Ashok may be just advising his friends and followers how to measure the current regime. Both ways, the tweet might have ruffled a lot of feathers.

khemka-case:-court-rubs-khattar's-nose-in-dirt-of-his-deed

Khemka case: Court rubs Khattar's nose in dirt of his deed

By IndianMandarins 18 Mar 2019

In this website, we have always advised the political administration to keep their dirty hands off from interfering in the career of civil servants; especially, the whistleblower officers. But Haryana CM Manoharlal Khattar and Union Health Minister JP Nadda are made of Congress cast and hence refuse to mend their behavior. One tried to harm the career of IAS officer Ashok Khemka by lower grading in the annual performance report; another did the same thing to Sanjiv Chaturvedi. And both, through their below-contempt deeds, have invited nice strictures from the courts.

 

On Monday, the Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected the adverse remarks made by Chief Minister Manohar Lal Khattar in Ashok Khemka’s performance appraisal report, asserting that senior IAS Officer’s “integrity is beyond doubt” and he needs to be protected from the damage being done to his career.

 

A division bench of Justices Rajiv Sharma and Kuldip Singh said, “We are of the view that a person of such professional integrity needs to be protected as the professional integrity in our political, social and administrative system is depleting very fast.”

 

The Court added, “Since the number of such officers whose integrity is beyond doubt and who have professional integrity of higher standard is depleting very fast, therefore, they need protection from being damaged by recording adverse remarks against the record.”

 

Ashok Khemka had sought the expunction of the adverse remarks made by Khattar in his annual performance appraisal report (APAR) of the year 2016-2017 and restoration of the overall grade of 9.92 as was given by the Reviewing Authority.

 

Khemka was represented by advocate Shreenath A Khemka in the matter before the High Court as well as the Central Administrative Tribunal, which in December 2018 had dismissed his application saying the accepting authority, who happens to the State Chief Minister, wrote the appraisal report within the limit prescribed under the rules.

 

Dismissing the CAT order, the division bench said, “The remarks of the Accepting Officer and the grading of 9.00 given by the Accepting Authority are hereby set aside and the opinion given by the Reviewing Authority is restored. The grading of 9.92 given by the Reviewing Authority is also restored and will prevail upon the grading given by the Reporting Authority.”

 

The division bench further said, “some of the matters are better understood than said in expressed words”.

 

“The severe constraints in which an honest and upright officer works under the political leadership are well known. There are so many pulls and pressures and the officer has to work according to the rules despite all these pulls and pressures. The Reviewing Authority has recorded that the petitioner is well known in the country for effective professional integrity under very difficult circumstances”.

khemka-pooh-poohs-haryana-govt's-pallbearers

Khemka pooh-poohs Haryana govt's pallbearers

By IndianMandarins 06 Mar 2019

The great Sangh Parivar and its equally great leaders have done great harm to their credibility by proving beyond doubt that their mental makeup is no better than those of the dynasts and their sycophants in dealing with honest officials like Ashok Khemka, Sanjiv Chaturvedi and a host of others. 

 

While Sanjiv has engaged in legal battles so-called nationalists pretending to be hawkers of Hindutava, Khemka has openly ridiculed their might. In a Tweet on Tuesday, he pooh-poohed the pallbearers of the Haryana government on his sixth transfer.

 

He wrote: “Whose interests do I protect? Yours or the people's you claim to represent? It's your arrogance that you will trample me under your feet. With pleasure, I have suffered repeatedly, let it be once more."

 

The 1991-batch IAS officer's tweet came two days after his transfer from a 15-month posting in the Sports and Youth Affairs Department, headed by mercurial state minister Anil Vij.

 

In his 27 year's long career, Khemka has been transferred 56 times - a world record. Before being transferred to the Sports and Youth Affairs Department in November 2017, he held the charge of principal secretary in the Social Justice and Empowerment Department.

 

Even at that time, he had taken to Twitter after the transfer order was issued. "So much work planned. News of another transfer. Crash landing again. Vested interests win. Deja vu. But this is temporary. Will continue with renewed vigor and energy" Khemka had tweeted then.

free stat counter