SANJIV CHATURVEDI IFS

wasting-taxpayers'-money-to-drag-an-avoidable-conflict-with-ex-cvo-aiims

Wasting taxpayers' money to drag an avoidable conflict with Ex-CVO AIIMS

The Central government and the AIIMS have tied themselves with proverbial Gordian knot in their dealings with Sanjiv Chaturvedi (IFoS:2002:UD). And the more they drag the case at the cost of poor taxpayers against an honest civil servant, the more they rub their nose time and again in the dust of the courtrooms.

 

In the latest instance, the Uttarakhand High Court has issued a contempt of court notice to Union Health Secretary Preeti Sudan (IAS:1983:AP) and AIIMS Director, Dr. Randeep Guleria,  for having failed to pay the cost of Rs 25,000 to Chaturvedi in accordance with the direction of the court.

 

In August, 2018, the Court had imposed that cost on the Centre for misleading the Principal Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal at New Delhi into staying proceedings in a service matter case filed by Chaturvedi before the Nainital bench wherein he had sought to quash his poor appraisal report for 2015-16 when he served as CVO at AIIMS New Delhi.

02 Jul 2019
khemka-case:-court-rubs-khattar's-nose-in-dirt-of-his-deed

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

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”.

18 Mar 2019
wasting-taxpayers'-money-to-drag-an-avoidable-conflict-with-ex-cvo-aiims

Wasting taxpayers' money to drag an avoidable conflict with Ex-CVO AIIMS

By IndianMandarins 02 Jul 2019

The Central government and the AIIMS have tied themselves with proverbial Gordian knot in their dealings with Sanjiv Chaturvedi (IFoS:2002:UD). And the more they drag the case at the cost of poor taxpayers against an honest civil servant, the more they rub their nose time and again in the dust of the courtrooms.

 

In the latest instance, the Uttarakhand High Court has issued a contempt of court notice to Union Health Secretary Preeti Sudan (IAS:1983:AP) and AIIMS Director, Dr. Randeep Guleria,  for having failed to pay the cost of Rs 25,000 to Chaturvedi in accordance with the direction of the court.

 

In August, 2018, the Court had imposed that cost on the Centre for misleading the Principal Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal at New Delhi into staying proceedings in a service matter case filed by Chaturvedi before the Nainital bench wherein he had sought to quash his poor appraisal report for 2015-16 when he served as CVO at AIIMS New Delhi.

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”.

not-just-a-civil-servant

Not just a civil servant

By IndianMandarins 07 Mar 2019

Indian Forest Service officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi may seem to possess all the qualities of a good civil servant enumerated by former GoI secretary Anil Swarup in his book 'Not just a civil Servant': courage, sacrifice, and endurance. That must be the reason for his rejection by so-called people's representatives of both the Congress and BJP types.

 

Consider his dealing as the Sole Arbitrator in a dispute between Asphalt Carpet Construction Company and Chandigarh Housing Board. When it came to the arbitration fee and expenses, he refused to accept remuneration and proposed to the parties concerned to contribute a convenient amount for the welfare of CRPF martyr’s family in the accounts of Ministry of Home Affairs opened for this specific purpose.

 

As per the amended Arbitration and Conciliation Act 2015, the Arbitration Fee could be Rs 2.20 lac and along with administrative expenses, his total remuneration was Rs 2.50 lac. However, in the orders passed in February this year, he declared his entire remuneration as Rs NIL and asked both the parties to deposit the amount into an MHA fund opened for the welfare of families of CRPF personnel killed in the Pulwama terror attack.

 

It is an irony that the officer had donated (which the PMO refused to accept) his award money (Raman Magsaysay) Rs 14 Lacs to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund after the AIIMS refused to accept his donation of the award money to the AIIMS for free treatment of underprivileged patients, a fact again mentioned in detail in a recent Supreme Court judgement of February this year. Interestingly, while serving at the Centre, his ministry gave him 01 rating/marking as APAR, and yet he refused to kowtow.

centre-was-vindictive-towards-whistleblower-officer:-sc

Centre was vindictive towards whistleblower officer: SC

By IndianMandarins 06 Feb 2019

In a surprising move the Apex Court has imposed a Rs 25,000 cost on the Centre upholding a Uttarakhand HC order which had found the Union government ‘vindictive’ towards Magsaysay award winner, Sanjiv Chaturvedi (IFS:2002:UD); formerly CVO, AIIMS.

 

The case relates to the Union Health Ministry which had given Chaturvedi, with the approval of the AIIMS Director and J P Nadda, a zero rating in the 2015-16 annual appraisal who had unearthed several scams involving senior officials, for which he had also given the Magsaysay award. Ironically, Chaturvedi had outstanding grading (APAR) till that year for 05 consecutive years and commended on record by the Union Health Secretary and Health minister for his exemplary work.

 

It may further be mentioned that the cost imposed by SC comes as an addition to an existing cost imposed by the Uttarakhand HC in 2018 when it held the Central govt to be vindicated against the whistleblower officer.

framework-being-formulated-for-action-against-cvc,-vcs-and-others

Framework being formulated for action against CVC, VCs and others

By IndianMandarins 28 Jan 2019

The government has initiated the process to frame guidelines for taking action, if required, against the office of chief vigilance commissioner (CVC), vigilance commissioners, and others holding equivalent posts.

 

Responding to an RTI query by Indian Forest Service officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi, the Union Ministry of Personnel has clarified that in the absence of any framework guideline, the government can't act on two complaints received by it over a year ago against Chief Vigilance Commissioner K.V. Chowdary.


Chaturvedi had in 2017 written to the President asking him to take action against Chowdary for recommending the closure of probe in alleged corruption cases at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) in New Delhi.

for-a-change,-chaturvedi-to-be-honoured-on-r-day

For a change, Chaturvedi to be honoured on R-Day

By IndianMandarins 21 Jan 2019

Keeping aside the quarrel between the central government and upright Indian Forest Service officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi, the Uttarakhand government has decided to honor the officer on the Republic Day for his outstanding contributions to forest research.

 

Even though 16 cases of central government's hamhanded dealing with him are pending in four High Courts and the Supreme Court, the chief forest officer of the state B K Gongte, in a letter dated January 19, 2019, has requested Chaturvedi to be present at the head office of the state forest department so that he could be honoured for his outstanding contributions to saving and reviving some of the endangered Himalayan botanical species.

 

The letter also expresses profound admiration of the department to Sanjiv's other 'out-of-box' contributions like involving the private sector in research activities for the preservation, conservation, and development of forestry in the state.

cic-seeks-details-of-corruption-complaints-from-pmo

CIC seeks details of corruption complaints from PMO

By IndianMandarins 22 Oct 2018

The Central Information Commission (CIC) has sought details about allegations of corruption against ministers sent to PMO. The CIC has directed the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to disclose complaints of corruption received against Union Ministers between 2014 and 2017 and the action taken on them.

 

CIC Radha Krishna Mathur, while considering a plea of whistle-blower IFS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi, directed the PMO to share information on the quantum and value of black money brought back from abroad during the tenure of the BJP-led government at the Centre, along with records of efforts made in this direction. The order asked the PMO to disclose information related to deposits made by the government in bank accounts of Indian citizens from the black money brought from abroad.

 

The PMO had termed the questions asked by Chaturvedi, in his RTI application related to black money, as not covered in the definition of “information” that can be accessed under the Right to Information Act, but Mathur rejected the contention.

 

“The commission further observed that the respondent has not given correct and specific reply/information to the appellant on point numbers 1(b) (corruption complaints against ministers), 4, 5, 12 & 13 (related to corruption in AIIMS) of the RTI application,” CIC Mathur noted.

free stat counter