Bombay High Court
Atul S/O Anandrao Jagtap vs The State Of Maharashtra, Department Of ... on 28 September, 2018
Author: B.P. Dharmadhikari
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari, Z.A. Haq
pil12.16 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 12 OF 2016
WITH
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 140 OF 2016
WITH
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 141 OF 2016
WITH
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 172 OF 2016
AND
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 173 OF 2016
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 12 OF 2016
JAN MANCH
Registration No. MAH 454/08
NAG, through its Advisor Shri
S.W. Patil, M-5, Premium Plaza,
Khare Town, Dharampeth,
Nagpur 440 010. ... PETITIONER
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra
through Additional Chief Secretary,
Home Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 400 032.
2. State of Maharashtra
through Secretary, Water Resources
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai
400 032.
3. Director General,
Anti Corruption Bureau,
Maharashtra, Sir Pochkhanwala Road,
Worli, Mumbai 400 030.
4. Superintendent of Police,
Anti Corruption Bureau,
Nagpur Range, New Administrative
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 :::
pil12.16 2
Building No. 1, 2nd Floor, Civil
Lines, Nagpur.
5. Vidarbha Irrigation Development
Corporation, through its Executive
Director, Sinchan Seva Bhavan,
Civil Lines, Nagpur -440 001.
6. Divisional Commissioner
(Revenue), Nagpur. ... RESPONDENTS
Shri F.T. Mirza, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri S.Y. Deopujari, GP for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 & 6.
Shri V.G. Palshikar, Advocate for respondent No. 5.
.....
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 140 OF 2016
Atul s/o Anandrao Jagtap,
aged about 37 years, occupation
- Agriculturist as well as
Contractor, r/o 47, Shivaji Nagar,
Near Shivaji Garden,
Yavatmal 445 001. ... PETITIONER
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra
Department of Irrigation,
through its Secretary, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 400 032.
2. Vidarbha Irrigation Development
Corporation, (A Government of
Maharashtra Undertaking) - through
its Executive Director, Near Old
Secretariat Building, Sinchan Seva Bhavan,
Civil Lines, Nagpur -440 001.
3. Water Resources Department
through its Chief Engineer, Upper
Wardha Colony, Shivaji Nagar,
Amravati.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 :::
pil12.16 3
4. The Executive Engineer,
MUN Project Division,
Khamgaon.
5. The Superintending Engineer,
Buldhana Irrigation Project Circle,
Water Resources Department,
Buldhana.
6. Bajoriya Construction Company
Private Limited, a Company
registered under the provisions of
the Companies Act, 1956, through
its Director, Balaji Chowk,
Yavatmal.
7. Ajitdada s/o Anantrao Pawar,
aged about 57 years, occupation
Ex-Deputy Chief Minister &
Irrigation Minister, r/o "Sahyog",
Baramati, Pune.
8. Shri Sandip s/o Rameshchandra
Bajoriya, aged about 46 years,
occupation - M.L.C. & Business,
r/o Darda Nagar, Near Darda
Nagar, Water Tank, Yavatmal
445 001. ... RESPONDENTS
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 141 OF 2016
Atul s/o Anandrao Jagtap,
aged about 37 years, occupation
- Agriculturist as well as
Contractor, r/o 47, Shivaji Nagar,
Near Shivaji Garden,
Yavatmal 445 001. ... PETITIONER
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra
Department of Irrigation,
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 :::
pil12.16 4
through its Secretary, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 400 032.
2. Vidarbha Irrigation Development
Corporation, (A Government of
Maharashtra Undertaking) - through
its Executive Director, Near Old
Secretariat Building, Sinchan Seva Bhavan,
Civil Lines, Nagpur -440 001.
3. Water Resources Department
through its Chief Engineer, Upper
Wardha Colony, Shivaji Nagar,
Amravati.
4. The Executive Engineer,
Amravati Project Construction Division,
Upper Wardha Colony, Amravati.
5. The Superintending Engineer,
Upper Wardha Irrigation Circle,
Wardha Colony, Amravati.
6. Bajoriya Construction Company
Private Limited, a Company
registered under the provisions of
the Companies Act, 1956, through
its Director, Balaji Chowk,
Yavatmal.
7. Ajitdada s/o Anantrao Pawar,
aged about 57 years, occupation
Ex-Deputy Chief Minister &
Irrigation Minister, r/o "Sahyog",
Baramati, Pune.
8. Shri Sandip s/o Rameshchandra
Bajoriya, aged about 46 years,
occupation - M.L.C. & Business,
r/o Darda Nagar, Near Darda
Nagar, Water Tank, Yavatmal
445 001. ... RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 :::
pil12.16 5
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 172 OF 2016
Atul s/o Anandrao Jagtap,
aged about 37 years, occupation
- Agriculturist as well as
Contractor, r/o 47, Shivaji Nagar,
Near Shivaji Garden,
Yavatmal 445 001. ... PETITIONER
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra
Department of Irrigation,
through its Secretary, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 400 032.
2. Vidarbha Irrigation Development
Corporation, (A Government of
Maharashtra Undertaking) - through
its Executive Director, Near Old
Secretariat Building, Sinchan Seva Bhavan,
Civil Lines, Nagpur -440 001.
3. Water Resources Department
through its Chief Engineer, Upper
Wardha Colony, Shivaji Nagar,
Amravati.
4. The Executive Engineer,
Amravati Irrigation Division,
Amravati.
5. The Superintending Engineer,
Amravati Irrigation Division,
Amravati (earlier the post of
Superintending Engineer was
attached to Akola Irrigation
Circle, Akola).
6. Bajoriya Construction Company
Private Limited, a Company
registered under the provisions of
the Companies Act, 1956, through
its Director, Balaji Chowk,
Yavatmal.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 :::
pil12.16 6
7. Ajitdada s/o Anantrao Pawar,
aged about 57 years, occupation
Ex-Deputy Chief Minister &
Irrigation Minister, r/o "Sahyog",
Baramati, Pune.
8. Shri Sandip s/o Rameshchandra
Bajoriya, aged about 46 years,
occupation - M.L.C. & Business,
r/o Darda Nagar, Near Darda
Nagar, Water Tank, Yavatmal
445 001. ... RESPONDENTS
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 173 OF 2016
Atul s/o Anandrao Jagtap,
aged about 37 years, occupation
- Agriculturist as well as
Contractor, r/o 47, Shivaji Nagar,
Near Shivaji Garden,
Yavatmal 445 001. ... PETITIONER
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra
Department of Irrigation,
through its Secretary, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 400 032.
2. Vidarbha Irrigation Development
Corporation, (A Government of
Maharashtra Undertaking) - through
its Executive Director, Near Old
Secretariat Building, Sinchan Seva Bhavan,
Civil Lines, Nagpur -440 001.
3. Water Resources Department
through its Chief Engineer, Upper
Wardha Colony, Shivaji Nagar,
Amravati.
4. The Executive Engineer,
Purna Medium Project Division,
Achalpur, District - Amravati.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 :::
pil12.16 7
5. The Superintending Engineer,
Amravati Irrigation Division,
Amravati (earlier the post of
Superintending Engineer was
attached to Akola Irrigation
Circle, Akola).
6. Bajoriya Construction Company
Private Limited, a Company
registered under the provisions of
the Companies Act, 1956, through
its Director, Balaji Chowk,
Yavatmal.
7. Ajitdada s/o Anantrao Pawar,
aged about 57 years, occupation
Ex-Deputy Chief Minister &
Irrigation Minister, r/o "Sahyog",
Baramati, Pune.
8. Shri Sandip s/o Rameshchandra
Bajoriya, aged about 46 years,
occupation - M.L.C. & Business,
r/o Darda Nagar, Near Darda
Nagar, Water Tank, Yavatmal
445 001. ... RESPONDENTS
Shri S.V. Purohit, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri A.S. Jaiswal, Senior Advocate with Shri S.Y. Deopujari, GP,
A.S. Fulzele, Additional GP and Shri P.S. Tembhare, AGP for
respondent Nos. 1, 3 to 5.
Shri V.G. Palshikar, Advocate for respondent No. 2.
Shri S.P. Dharmadhikari, Senior Advocate with Shri P.P. Deshmukh,
Senior Advocate for respondent No. 6.
Shri A.Y. Anturkar, Senior Advocate with Shri R. Joshi, Advocate for
respondent No. 7.
Shri A.Y. Sakhare, Senior Advocate with Shri N.B. Kalwaghe,
Advocate for respondent No. 8.
.....
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
Z.A. HAQ, JJ.
SEPTEMBER 28, 2018.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 :::
pil12.16 8
ORDER :(PER B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. The consideration in this order is about need of an inquiry into omissions or delay in investigations or initiating proceedings for misconducts/ misappropriation; to examine, for that purpose, appointment of an independent committee and whether for loss caused to public revenue, a principle like collective responsibility of entire department can be resorted to? The hearing has been conducted in the backdrop of various orders passed by this Court from time to time in this Public Interest Litigation and some other PILs like matter of alleged MNREGA scam in Forest Development Corporation or scholarship grants released by the Tribal Development Department.
3. Before proceeding further, it will be appropriate to narrate the history briefly. It is also appearing in the order dated 31.03.2016 passed by this Court.
4. The prayer in the petition is to direct the State of Maharashtra to hand over the investigation of irrigation scam ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 9 in Vidarbha Region to Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) by taking it away from the State Anti Corruption Bureau. The petitioners also seek a time bound programme for its completion. Similar prayers were made earlier in PIL No. 92 of 2012 filed by this petitioner only and in another PIL No. 83 of 2012 filed by one Mohan Karemore. When these two Public Interest Litigations were before the Court on 12.12.2014, the State of Maharashtra through its Advocate General communicated instructions of the Hon'ble Chief Minister. The Hon'ble Chief Minister made a statement that in the interest of justice and administration, the Government had permitted holding of an open inquiry by the ACB of the State insofar as involvement of political parties and leaders like Shri Ajit Pawar, Shri Sunil Tatkare and Shri Chhagan Bhujbal was concerned. The Advocate General then assured the High Court that he would impress upon the Government to inquire into conduct of Contractors and Officers of the department and initiate action in appropriate cases. Accepting this statement, two Public Interest Litigations filed in the year 2012 were disposed of.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 10
5. The instant Public Interest Litigations then came to be filed pointing that the assurance noted by this Court on 12.12.2014 has not been kept. The Court has in its order dated 31.03.2016 recorded that it is not concerned with any particular individual and only question was whether the State was keeping its promise given to this Court. Contingent upon it was the question whether inquiry should be permitted to continue with ACB ? By that order itself this Court has noted the settled principles of law that it cannot monitor the investigation. Further course taken by these PILs show how the adjournments were taken on one count or the other, and no effective orders could be passed. We, at this juncture, find it not necessary to go into those details.
6. On 28.08.2017, when the matter was listed almost after a gap of one year, this Court noticed that the respective counsel appearing before it did not have instructions or up- dates. The Court, therefore, directed developments to be placed on record on an affidavit within one week. The petitioner then made a grievance that the order of this Court dated 15.09.2016 releasing payment to a contractor was ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 11 conditional and subject to his completing work by 30.06.2017. The work was then not complete. The PIL then was listed and adjourned to one more date. On 28.02.2018, two envelops containing reports were placed on record. On 04.04.2018, this Court noted a statement made by the Government Pleader that copies of charge sheets, if filed, would be supplied to the petitioners. The said PIL with Public Interest Litigation Nos. 140 of 2016, 141 of 2016, 172 of 2016 and 173 of 2016, then came to be listed before this Court on 06.07.2018.
7. In the order dated 06.07.2018, this Court has again briefly mentioned history to take note of delay. Then there is reference to the order dated 22.02.2018 putting on record doubt about willingness on the part of Investigating Agency and the State Government to proceed in the matter. This Court then has placed its anguish on record and time was given to the Chief Secretary to explain. He was also warned to come clean. On 14.03.2018, this Court had reminded the State Government of its assurance and about orders passed on 12.12.2014 while disposing of PIL Nos. 83 of 2012 and 92 of 2012. On 05.05.2018, the submission made on behalf of the ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 12 State Government that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising of 13 officers is constituted has been taken on record. This Court then directed officers appointed as members of SIT to file individual affidavits giving necessary details. Accordingly, affidavits have been filed by those 13 officers constituting SIT. Our order dated 06.07.2018 also takes note of observation of Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) that during performance review of VIDC for five financial years from 2006-07 to 2010-11, numerous observations of mismanagement of irrigation projects have been made. Those observations included cost overruns, ill planning, shortage of funds due to reckless tendering, overlapping of schemes, poor quality of work, sudden change in design resulting in cost escalation. In that order, it is put on record that earlier Court had expressed faith and believed that the matter would be inquired and investigated into. It is also observed that until and unless inquiry and investigation was not monitored by an independent committee on regular basis, it would never be taken to logical end. Hearing then was adjourned to 12.07.2018.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 13
8. On 12.07.2018, the Government sought time of two weeks to enable the Director General of ACB for the State of Maharashtra to prepare a responsible report and to present it to this Court. We have expressed our dissatisfaction on this request for adjournment and adjournment was also opposed by the petitioners. On that day, the Court has taken note of objection by the respective Senior Advocates appearing for respondent Nos. 7 & 8 to the arrangement proposed by this Court. However, taking overall view of the matter, we granted time of one week to the Government Pleader and permitted the Director General to place on record that affidavit. The State Government was also directed to explain steps taken by it to provide necessary infrastructure to the Committee, if this Court constituted it.
9. It is in this backdrop that the matter was heard on 19.07.2018. This Court then has taken note of the fact that though at a stage when the matter could have been handed over to CBI, State Government was permitted by it to form SIT and hence, earlier the Government did not appear to be serious. On 19.07.2018, Government was seeking time of six ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 14 months to complete investigation by SIT. Thus, investigation into alleged wrongs committed prior to 2008, assured in 2012, was not taken up earnestly till constitution of SIT in April/ May 2018. This Court in that view of the matter, while passing this order noted that progress was not satisfactory. In para 11, this Court expressed that such procedural delays needed to be addressed. It has also pointed out how in PIL concerning Forest Development Corporation Limited, this Court found that for more than two years it was made to dwell under a wrong impression and then it was suddenly disclosed that most of the records (accounts) are damaged by white ants. The Special Auditor appointed for conducting audit, therefore, could not complete it at all. In another matter, concerning Tribal Development Department and Scholarships, this Court found that a Committee of retired judge Shri Gaikwad of this Court was appointed and after that Committee submitted report, another Committee of an IAS officer Shri Karandikar came to be appointed to decide further course of action. Thus, report submitted by Justice Gaikwad Committee after prolonged inquiry was not implemented and Karandikar Committee came to be appointed which further delayed it. This Court then also ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 15 noted that in office notes of the State Government, at the stage when question of initiating disciplinary action came up, Rule 27 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982, was pressed into service selectively. This Court found that to cover up superior bureaucrats, attention was being invited to that rule and while it came to officers in Group 'B' or Group 'C' or employees in Group 'D', that rule was being overlooked. It is in this backdrop, we have made following observations in paragraph 16 onwards up to paragraph 19 of order dated 19.07.2018.
"16. In this situation, we find that to avoid repetition on such delays with a view to permit officers to retire smoothly and thereafter to seek shelter of Rule 27 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982, some inquiry is necessary. The inquiry need not be on merits of the offence but to find out officers responsible for delaying it.
17. The other aspect which has been troubling this Court since long time is inability of the State to fasten the liability on any individual specifically. The way records are maintained / preserved may itself render identification of any individual impossible. In the matter of FDCM gunny bags of vouchers were handed over to the special ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 16 Auditor appointed by the State Government and the vouchers were also not in chronological order. We are still hearing that controversy and hence, we are not observing more in this respect. If statement of learned Senior Advocate Shri Jaiswal that records are voluminous and technical expertise is necessary is correct, the possession of the records and the documents necessary for investigation and proving the charge assumes importance. We have with this end in view already obtained affidavits of the officers constituting S.I.T. on record of this PIL.
18. We proposed to appoint a Committee to inquire into the cause of this delay and the Committee may question all present officers and ex-officers as also the concerned persons including politicians to find out the causes for delay.
19. Merely because the individual liability cannot be fastened, the loss to public revenue cannot be wiped out. The State Government is artificial person functioning through various arms. If one of its department malfunctions, the State Government cannot disown its liability to the common man. If it is the responsibility of the entire department to prepare and preserve records, the officers who have retired as also the present officers, who form part of that arm (department) of the State Government have to suffer collectively. Perhaps in such situation, the ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 17 entire department may be required to be punished by bringing down salary and by transferring the deducted portion to public revenue or by denying bonus or similar benefits. In PIL this Court need not attempt to find out the individual responsible for resultant delay. Question before us is whether all employees forming department can be made to suffer."
Arguments have been advanced before us in the backdrop of those observations.
10. At the outset, the affidavit of Prakash Khanderao Pawar, Superintending Engineer, VIDC, Nagpur, in PIL No.12 of 2016 tendered in Court on 26.07.2018 needs mention. He has given brief history right from 1997 till the constitution of SIT. In paragraph No. 21 of said affidavit, he has mentioned that 80 tenders costing Rs. 4,196 crores under Gosikhurd Project were cancelled by VIDC in terms of Government Resolution dated 23.09.2016 and Technical Audit and Work Audit as per Government Resolution dated 27.05.2016 is under progress through Vigilance Unit and Quality Control Wing of Government of Maharashtra. Technical Audit of 22 Works of Gosikhurd Project is finished by Vigilance Cell, Nagpur and ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 18 work of Audit of 38 tender works is completed by the Superintending Engineer, Quality Control Wing, Nagpur. The Technical Audit of tenders under investigation for Jigaon Project was completed by Vigilance Wing, Amravati of Government of Maharashtra. This statement, therefore, shows that action after assurance given to this court in 2012 or in present matters was rather a farce or then halfhearted exercise done after above mentioned Government Resolutions. Dates on which exercise was undertaken and completed, are not placed on record. Needless to mention that these details are coming on record for the first time in affidavit tendered on 26.07.2018. It is almost six years after filing of earlier PIL in 2012 and that too after orders are passed by this Court in the matter.
11. In paragraph No. 22 of this affidavit, it is mentioned that Departmental Inquiry of 15 officers of Gosikhurd Projects under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, is finalized at government level. It is further mentioned in paragraph 23 that the departmental inquiry of 51 officers (other than Gosikhurd Project) is being conducted under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Conduct) Rules and is in ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 19 progress at Government level. The dates on which these inquiries have been initiated are not disclosed. The dates on which inquiries of 15 officers of Gosikhurd Project have been finished/finalized are also not disclosed. When questioned in open Court, Shri Palshikar, learned counsel, upon instructions, explained that inquiries have been completed in 2014 only; however, no orders punishing anybody or exonerating anybody has been passed. In relation to 'C' group (of 51 officers), such instructions could not be provided to Shri Palshikar, learned counsel or to the learned Government Pleader, by the officers present.
12. In paragraph No. 24 of this affidavit, it is mentioned that 26 projects in Amravati region are being investigated into by the Superintendent of Police, ACB, Amravati. It is mentioned that information in relation to tender forms of Jigaon Project (9 in number) pertaining to the period under investigation i.e. from 2003 to 2011 are given to said Superintendent of Police. Information in relation to other 25 Projects (42 tenders) is also supplied to that authority. Again dates on which this compliance has been made are not ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 20 disclosed.
13. In paragraph No. 25 of said affidavit, it is submitted that 16 Projects (excluding Gosikhurd Project) are being investigated by the ACB, Nagpur. Complete information about 40 tender works costing more than Rs.25 crores in relation to Gosikhurd Project is given to ACB, Nagpur. Information about contract works costing more than Rs. One crore from Gosikhurd Project & out of total 66 tender works, information relating to 62 tender works is also given to that authority. Information in respect of other 16 projects, about Revised Administrative Approval in the prescribed proforma has been given to that authority and it is in relation to 364 tenders. Lastly, it is claimed that there is no delay in submitting documents to ACB by VIDC. When this Court inquired about dates on which relevant information was supplied, adjournment was sought to place additional affidavit on record. It needs to be highlighted here that in almost all PILs of such nature, the office of the Government Pleader or then other public bodies like VIDC filed their affidavits without giving necessary details as an eye wash and effort is made to ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 21 persuade this Court to accept it and close the hearing. This mode and manner of assisting Court & that too in PIL is highly objectionable. The respondents perhaps expect courts to turn nelsons' eye to such glaring omissions and lapses in matters where allegations/ accusations and audit objections are about misappropriation of several hundred/ thousands of crores of rupees.
14. Another affidavit has been filed by the Executive Director, VIDC - Shri Avinash V. Surve. He is working as Secretary (CAD), Water Resources Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. There again, Committees earlier constituted by the State Government to inquire into this scam- like Mr. Vadnere Committee and Dr. Madhav Rao Chitale Committee are pointed out. In paragraph No. 4, it is submitted that after examining those reports, Government took a courageous decision to cancel / foreclose 91 on-going tenders to eliminate possibilities of irregularities. This decision taken on 30.08.2016 by Cabinet is also claimed to be unprecedented. Thus, 94 tenders worth Rs.7,335/- crore have been terminated/ foreclosed. The decision was taken to allow the inquiry by Anti Corruption Bureau into all these 94 tenders to continue. Again, this use of power or plea regarding ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 22 unprecedented decision, conveniently ignores resultant huge time lost thereby prejudicing the investigation and affidavit avoids to explain it. In paragraph No. 5, it is claimed that Departmental Inquiries have been initiated against 77 officers of VIDC. One of them is of the rank of the Executive Director/ Secretary, 8 officers are of rank of Chief Engineer, 14 are Superintending Engineers while 54 are Executive Engineers or in other ranks below it. These inquiries are claimed to be in progress but the dates on which inquiries have been initiated, steps therein or stages thereof, have not been disclosed. Thereafter achievements of VIDC are also being pressed into service. But then there is no effort still to exhibit "the due diligence" for which adjournments were taken in the past.
15. In democracy, every department of Government and every employee of government has to give its best and cannot boast about it. Simultaneously, it has to be also transparent and cannot avoid accountability. In both affidavits mentioned supra, observations of this Court in its order dated 19.07.2018 on accountability are overlooked and no data having bearing on it, is placed on record. When the respondents are aware that this Court is examining the ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 23 bonafides of the State in investigating into allegations of misconduct/ wrongs committed 10 or more years back; their status as public servants and as Government of people, obliged respondents to place responsible affidavits with suitable dates and developments and such relevant details. With restraint, we only observe that right from date of consideration of grievance in PIL in 2012 till today, this responsible approach is conspicuous absent in the matter. The bureaucrats responsible for advising the government have remained happy with adjournments only and every attempt has been made to see that hearing is avoided or no effective order passed by this Court. Similar approach has been noticed in other PILs by this Court and that led us to pass orders on 19.07.2018. Here, added fact is, in March 2018, this Court gave respondents one more opportunity and constitution of SIT was allowed. It appears that police officers already investigating into the matter were then named on or turned into SIT. The developments thereafter have been noted by us. We find that after this Court started passing orders which blamed the respondents, things appear to have started moving. We only hope that things have moved in right direction. ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 24
16. It is in this backdrop that this Court expected assistance from the respective counsel in the matter. Shri S.V. Purohit, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners has relied upon the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in paragraphs 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 33, 40, 49, 50 of the judgment in the case of Ram Jethmalani & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., reported at (2011) 8 SCC 1. He points out that there the Hon'ble Apex Court has noted the "laggard pace" in which the investigations proceeded, lapses in it and found that it was necessary to pass orders appointing Special Investigation Team (SIT) and for disclosure to the petitioner of certain documents relied by the Union of India. He reads out the contentions of the petitioners as reproduced by the Hon'ble Apex Court and urges that serious reservations expressed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in paragraph 40 should also hold good in present matter. He has placed strong reliance upon paragraph Nos. 49 to 54. He submits that when people are uneducated and illiterate, suffer from hunger and squalor, this Court must step in such matters. He submits that bureaucrats and leaders have for obvious reasons come together and betrayed the faith reposed in them by the Country and the common man.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 25
17. To urge that in PIL this Court should only fasten collective responsibility on the entire department and concerned ministry, he has taken support from the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in paragraph Nos. 8 to 11 in the case of Lucknow Development Authority vs. M.K. Gupta, reported at (1994) 1 SCC 243. He submits that the concerned department of the State Government has to compensate the public revenue for loss of tax payers money and for that, each and every employee or officer therein must be made to contribute. According to him, fastening of individual liabilities in matters like present one, after such a long delay may not be successful/ possible, however, when department including Ministry are responsible for such delay, it must also be made accountable by directing it to make good that loss collectively. The concerned Ministry or department can after discharging their primary obligation, may conduct Departmental Enquiries or other similar exercise to fasten liability on their colleagues or ex-colleagues and attempt to recover money lost by them from such ex-colleagues or ex- officers. For their connivance with each other, common man and a tax-payer cannot be made to suffer.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 26
18. Shri Mirza, learned counsel also supports the arguments of Shri Purohit, learned counsel. He has in rather harsh words commented upon non-cooperation shown by the respondents by filing faulty affidavit today and their omission to disclose necessary particulars.
19. Shri A.S. Jaiswal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the State Government has, upon instructions, attempted to urge that present political party's government is in office since 2014 only. We have not permitted him to adopt said line as the issue is not in relation to any political party. The government is an artificial person, always available and here the records right from the year 2003 onwards are under scrutiny, since 2012.
20. Shri Jaiswal, learned counsel also submitted that there is no unreasonable delay in the matter. He points out that open inquiry into the alleged corruption has been permitted long back in 2015 only. He has taken us through respective affidavits to point out huge task, administrative and technical niceties. He submits that in this situation, time taken ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 27 cannot be viewed as delay at all.
21. On issue regarding constituting a Committee to see that investigation is not delayed or to fasten responsibility about such delay, he submits that committee cannot be legally constituted as it would be an invasion of rights available to Investigating Agency and adversely prejudice the process and it may also end up in bestowing some advantage upon the accused. Without prejudice, he adds that such Committee and officer defending himself before it, will need the very same papers which are vital to prove charge in criminal court. He points out that this Court has, in the matters in which charge sheets are already filed, already expedited the trials before the Special Court. Those trials would get delayed and unscrupulous elements may use new platform to their advantage thereby defeating the very object and purpose of these PILs.
22. On the aspect of collective responsibility, he adds that in law, such a concept is unknown. The recovery from employee is possible as a punishment only after the employee ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 28 is found guilty in the Departmental Enquiry. The legal provisions for conducting such inquiries or effecting such recoveries exists and hence it would be unconstitutional to direct such recovery from the entire department of the State Government collectively. The recovery, if necessary, must be from an individual found guilty of misconduct.
23. Shri Dhakephalkar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for respondent No. 7 states that the Committee, if constituted by this Court to inquire into delays, would be indirectly monitoring the investigation itself and such a course of action is legally not permissible. According to him, delay in investigation no doubt may cause prejudice to public as cost escalates and the entire tender exercise is required to be undertaken again, however, here the investigation is into alleged cost escalation, illegal award of tenders, allotment of works to tenderers who were not eligible or then works being not completed. All this, if true, are matter of history and as such, alleged delay in finding out cause thereof by itself, cannot cause prejudice to the prosecution. He submits that, therefore, the alleged irregularities or wrongs and delay being ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 29 complained of, have no relevance or bearing on each other.
24. On composition of Committee, he relies upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Manohar Lal Sharma vs. Principal Secretary & Ors., reported at (2014) 2 SCC 532, particularly paragraph Nos. 38, 39, 43, 44 & 57, to further his submission that it is nothing but monitoring investigation and such investigation brings down moral of investigation agency and even honest public officers. He claims that delay alleged is into investigation and, therefore, steps and attempts to investigate taken in past will be required to be looked into. He points out that State Government has now assured that investigation into all First Information Reports will be completed within 90 days. He contends that in this situation, considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, formation of such Committee is uncalled for.
25. Shri Sakhare, learned Senior Advocate appearing for respondent No. 8 adopts the arguments of Shri Dhakephalkar, learned Senior Advocate to avoid repetitions. He adds that the total budget for VIDC from 1997-98 till 2014- ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 30 15 is of Rs. 27,828.96 crore and as such there cannot be misappropriation of Rs. 70,000 crores. He has again relied upon the affidavits tendered today to demonstrate that service law and discipline rules are playing their role in the matter.
26. He adds that there is presumption of innocence and by directing inquiry into delay (alleged) in investigation, this Court causes prejudice to the alleged wrong doers or accused persons. Without prejudice, he adds that at the most, after charge sheet is filed, delay into investigation can be looked into. To buttress his submissions, he has relied upon observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in paragraph No.10 of judgment in the case of Union of India vs. Prakash P. Hinduja and Anr., reported at (2003) 6 SCC 195, paragraph 36 of judgment in the case of Common cause (A Registered Society) vs. Union of India & Ors., reported at (2008) 5 SCC 511 and also judgment relied upon by Shri Dhakephalkar, learned Senior Advocate in the case of Manohar Lal Sharma vs. Principal Secretary & Ors., (supra).
27. He contends that by long delays in investigation ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 31 and prosecution, fundamental right of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is violated and he is also put to prejudice. He, therefore, submits that accepting the statement of the State Government that investigation into the entire matter would be over within 90 days and charge sheets would be filed, present proceedings should be brought to an end.
28. Shri Dhakephalkar, learned Senior Advocate with leave of Court submits that the judgment relied upon by the petitioner in the case of Lucknow Development Authority vs. M.K. Gupta, (supra), is about a consumer dispute where entirely different principles apply. The judgment in the case of Ram Jethmalani & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., (supra) is in relation to an issue having material impact on national interest . He submits that there the Hon'ble Apex Court has also resorted to its inherent powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. He submits that even in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. vs Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development , reported at AIR 1995 SC 94, when there was no legal provision occupying the field of caste verification, the Hon'ble Apex ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 32 Court had filled in lacunae only. However, here when field is occupied and laws meeting all situations exists, recourse to said Article 142 also is unwarranted.
29. In brief reply, Shri Mirza, learned counsel has submitted that the affidavits placed on record on 26.07.2018 itself points out need for appointment of a Committee to monitor the day-to-day developments. He submits that departmental inquiries against most of the officers may have rendered illusory because of their superannuation and operation of bar in Rule 27 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982.
30. This court during hearing expressed that pendency of matter before it since 2012, incomplete or insufficient data disclosed to Court on affidavits and frequent adjournments may itself be a cause for inquiry. Timely cognizance of complaints would have obviated need of Court intervention. The Court then pointed out that State Government and public bodies including the petitioners may have spent considerable amount on this litigation and valuable time of this Court is also ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 33 consumed by it. The responsibility, at least for this loss towards the tax payer needed to be fixed.
31. It is to be noted that this Court has on 26.07.2018, after conclusion of arguments, taken brief note of developments pointed out by the State Government and passed an order to that effect. At the end, that order again permitted State Government and VIDC to place on record any other fact which they felt necessary in public interest, within one week.
32. A citizen or tax payer or the civil society is not expected to prove what went wrong or who did or contributed to it when those who may have secured wrongful gain constitute a group and share common intention to avoid detection. These employees, collectively, see to it that individual misdeeds cannot be "reached" or detected. If they can come together to further their non-auspicious object, why the innocent citizens who are made to pay, cannot ask for holding them all together liable at least in civil law. Why design of such employees to see that accounts or records are not maintained or preserved, is not sufficient to hold them all ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:01 ::: pil12.16 34 responsible jointly ? When there can be a concerted effort by wrongdoers to escape the penalty, the situation warrants recourse to joint punishment and joint recovery. Other employees who kept mum and permitted wrongs to go on, must suffer for ignoring their watch-dog obligation to the society.
33. All employees are at first the citizens of India and bound to honour the commitment flowing from "We, the people of India". Those who feel that they are not guilty can prefer to fight with their colleagues and get back their dues from such guilty persons. Otherwise, they also have to suffer for not thwarting the design of their colleagues and for contributing to a situation in which the public at large is made to suffer. Rules of procedure and discipline cannot be breached with impunity and "unlawful group" which allows it cannot plead for mercy.
34. We must try to balance the individual interest of employee with common concern or larger public interest. Collusive scheme to defeat personal liability of any individual ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 35 employee necessitates adoption of an approach which will effectively redress cause of common man and strengthen his confidence in the democracy.
35. Imagine a group of men playing a game of cricket on public road. Their ball breakes a window pane of an adjacent house owned by Mr. A, who wants compensation for it. He does not know whether it was a shot by a batsman or an overthrow by a fielder which broke the glass pane. Ideally he should not even bother to know it and entire group of men must compensate him. Within their group, the men may further apportion the liability by fastening the responsibility for act either on the batsman or a fielder. They may undertake this exercise of affixing the individual liability or may not find it necessary, but then it is their internal affair. Mr. 'A' is a stranger to that exercise and his grievance stands redressed when he receives compensation.
There may be few niceties like said game was being played by two teams and hence, permitting a contention that only batsman or only fielder was responsible, or then only one team has to shoulder the compensation. This may make the ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 36 consideration little complex but then adopting "collective responsibility" remains the fundamental need if Mr. A's grievance is to be addressed expediently.
36. Innocent tax payer is positioned like Mr. 'A'. He needs damage or injury to be redressed and may not be interested in futile exercise of criminal prosecution or disciplinary proceedings when team members will "act" together with predetermined object of avoiding the determination or adjudication of that liability.
37. Judgments delivered by the Hon'ble Apex Court may also throw some light on this aspect. In Ram Jethmalani v. Union of India, reported at (2011) 8 SCC 1 : it is observed --
"41. During the course of the hearing the Union of India repeatedly insisted that the matter involves many jurisdictions, across the globe, and a proper investigation could be accomplished only through the concerted efforts by different law enforcement agencies, both within the Central Government, and also various State Governments. However, the absence of any satisfactory explanation of the slowness of the pace of investigation, and lack of any credible answers as to why the ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 37 respondents did not act with respect to those actions that were feasible, and within the ambit of powers of the Enforcement Directorate itself, such as custodial investigation, leads us to conclude that the lack of seriousness in the efforts of the respondents are contrary to the requirements of laws and constitutional obligations of the Union of India. It was only upon the insistence and intervention of this Court that the Enforcement Directorate initiated and secured custodial interrogation over Hassan Ali Khan.
42. The Union of India has explicitly acknowledged that --------- ............. --------------- .......... --------- ..........
----------- cropped up. So far, no significant attempt has been made to investigate and verify the same. This is a further cause for the grave concerns of this Court, and points to the need for continued, effective and day-to-day monitoring by an SIT constituted by this Court, and acting on behalf, behest and direction of this Court.
54. The issue is not merely whether the Union of India is making the necessary effort to bring back all or some significant part of the alleged monies. The fact that there is some information and knowledge that such vast amounts may have been stashed away in foreign banks, implies that the State has the primordial responsibility, under the Constitution, to make every effort to trace the sources of such monies, punish the guilty where such ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 38 monies have been generated and/ or taken abroad through unlawful activities, and bring back the monies owed to the country. We do recognise --------- ...........
-------- ......... ----------- .............. can also be expected to bear fruit in terms of building capacities, and the development of necessary attitudes to take the law enforcement part of accounting or following the money seriously in the future.
55. The merits of vigour of investigations, and attempts at law enforcement, cannot be measured merely on the scale of what we accomplish with respect to what has happened in the past. It would necessarily also have to be appreciated from the benefits that are likely to accrue to the country in preventing such activities in the future. Our people may be poor, and may be suffering from all manner of deprivation. However, the same poor and suffering masses are rich, morally and from a humanistic point of view. Their forbearance of the many foibles and failures of those who wield power, no less in their name and behalf than of the rich and the empowered, is itself indicative of their great qualities, of humanity, trust and tolerance. That greatness can only be matched by exercise of every sinew, and every resource, in the broad goal of our constitutional project of bringing to their lives dignity. The efforts that this Court makes in this regard, and will make in this respect ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 39 and these matters, can only be conceived as a small and minor, though nevertheless necessary, part. Ultimately the protection of the Constitution and striving to promote its vision and values is an elemental mode of service to our people."
In Delhi Transport Corporation vs. D.T.C. Mazdoor Congress & Ors., (04.09.1990 - SC) : MANU/SC/0031/1991, the Hon'ble Apex Court notes -
"18. The aforesaid position of a government servant has been analysed in depth by the decision of this Court in Union of India v. Tulsi Ram Patel, (supra), where it was reiterated that the doctrine of pleasure is not a relic of the feudal ages or based upon any special prerogative of the Crown but is based on public interest and for the public good because it is as much in public interest and for public good that government servants who are inefficient, dishonest or corrupt or have become a security risk should not continue in service and that the protection afforded to them by the Acts and the Rules made under Article 309 and by Article 311 of the Constitution, be not abused by them to the detriment of the public interest and public good. It was reiterated on page 190 of the report that if in a situation as envisaged in one of the three clauses of the second proviso to Clause (2) of Article 311 arises and the relevant clause is ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 40 properly applied and the disciplinary inquiry dispensed with, the concerned government servant cannot be heard to complain that he is deprived of his livelihood. This Court reiterated that the livelihood of an individual is a matter of great concern to him and his family but his livelihood is a matter of his private interest where such livelihood is provided by the public exchequer and the taking away of such livelihood is in the public interest and for the public good, and the former must yield to the latter public policy, it was reiterated, requires, public interest needs and public good demands that there should be such a doctrine. It was further reiterated that the rules of natural justice are not immutable but flexible. These rules can be adopted and modified by statutes and statutory rules and also by the Constitution of the Tribunal which has to decide a particular matter and the rules by which such Tribunal is governed. Not only, can the principles of natural justice be modified but in exceptional cases they can even be excluded. See the observations of this Court at page 237 G of the aforesaid report. Reference was also made to the observations of this Court at pages 214-215 of the aforesaid report.
Thus, the Constitution Bench laid down that even where a government servant enjoys constitutional status there can be exclusion of inquiry in the cases prescribed for termination of employment."
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 41
"312. Undoubtedly efficiency of the administration and the discipline among the employees is very vital to the successful functioning of an institution or maximum production of goods or proper maintenance of the services. Discipline in that regard among the employees is its essential facet and has to be maintained. The society is vitally interested in the due discharge of the duties by the government employees or employees of corporate bodies or statutory authorities or instrumentalities under Article 12 of the Constitution. As held in Tulsiram Patel's case the public are vitally interested in the efficiency and integrity of the public service. The government or corporate employees are, after-all, paid from the public exchequer to which everyone contributes either by way of direct or indirect taxes. The employees are charged with public duty and they should perform their public duties with deep sense of responsibility. The collective responsibility of all the officers from top most to the lowest maximises the efficient public administration. They must, therefore, be held to have individual as well as collective responsibility in discharge of their duties faithfully, honestly with full dedication and utmost devotion to duty for the progress of the country. Equally the employees must also have a feeling that they have security of tenure. They should also have an involvement on their part in the organisation or institution, corporation, etc. They need ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 42 assurance of service and they need protection. The public interest and the public good demand, that those who discharge their duties honestly, efficiently and with a sense of devotion and dedication to duty should receive adequate protection and security of tenure. Equally inefficient, dishonest and corrupt or who became security risk should be weeded out so that successful functioning of the industry or manufacture of the goods or rendering or services would be available at the maximum level to the society and society thereby receives optimum benefit from the public money expanded on them as salary and other perks. Therefore, when a situation envisaged under statute or statutory rule or regulation or instructions having statutory force to remove or dismiss an employee the question arises whether they need at least minimum protection of fair play in action."
Lack of proper procedure to meet such situations and need to hold disciplinary inquiries in exceptional matters is also noticed or felt by the Hon'ble Apex Court. In Brajendra Singh Yambem v. Union of India, reported at (2016) 9 SCC 20, Hon'ble Apex Court has framed the points for determination in para 31 as under -
"31.1. (i) Whether the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court correctly ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 43 appreciates the scope of Rule 9(2)(b)(ii) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, in the light of the fact that the disciplinary proceedings were initiated more than four years after the alleged incidents?
31.2. (ii) Whether the impugned judgment and order is erroneous and is vitiated in law?
31.3. (iii) What order?"
For present purposes, the approach adopted by the Apex Court is more relevant and it can be seen in its answer to point no. (iii).
"Answer to Point (iii)
52. For the aforesaid reasons, we answer the questions of law that arose for consideration of this Court in favour of the appellant. The Division Bench of the High Court erred in allowing Writ Appeals Nos. 39 and 40 of 2011.
Therefore, the impugned judgment1 is liable to be set aside and accordingly, set aside.
53. Though we have answered the questions of law framed in this case in favour of the appellant and set aside the impugned judgment by allowing these appeals, however, having regard to the seriousness of the allegations made against the appellant, in exercise of power of this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 44 of India, we direct the disciplinary authority to continue the disciplinary proceedings and conclude them within six months in accordance with the relevant provisions of law as well as the principles of natural justice. If the same are not completed within the said time period by the disciplinary authority, the said liberty granted by this Court in this order to the respondents will not ensue to their benefit."
"54. The appeals are partly allowed only to the extent of answering the legal questions framed and the impugned judgment and order is set aside to that extent with the above liberty given to the respondents. All the pending applications are disposed of. No costs."
While disposing of the PIL No. 5 of 2013 in the matter of Forest Development Corporation on 01.08.2018, We have already formed a committee of Hon'ble Justice R.C. Chavan (retired) and learned District Judge Shri K.B. Zinzarde (retired). In this order, in paragraphs 11 & 12 this Court has observed as under-
"11. In view of this, we find that all matters where the allegations and misappropriation are levelled & financial irregularities are prima facie apparent, same must be reported to an independent agency which should thereafter monitor its day-to-day progress so that time is ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 45 not lost & benefits accused persons or delinquent officers. We have already taken note of shelter of Rule 27 of Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982, being taken in such matters by employees. Responsibility to maintain records, to preserve records is of Government employees. When they or their colleagues see to it that records do not become available, a common man or a tax payer is not expected to be a mute spectator to this situation. Employees or Officers cannot be allowed to walk free because charges cannot be established or offence cannot be punished. Entire system or department cannot take advantage of its own wrongs to validate the misconducts. In other matters, we have therefore passed an order and we are trying to find out whether liability can be collectively fastened on entire department in such matters. No Court can tolerate this state of affairs. Politicians or bureaucrats cannot hoodwink the "law"
like this.
12. In this situation, taking overall view of the matter, we find that such matters arising out of the departments of State Government need to be looked into immediately in public interest by an independent committee which shall not be influenced by another considerations. We therefore appoint a committee consisting of a Retired Hon'ble Judge of this Court Shri R.C. Chavan and a Retired then District Judge Shri K.B. Zinjarde. The Committee member shall receive necessary ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 46 assistance in relation to its office infrastructure and other facilities from State Government. Their honorarium shall be as paid to other Judges on similar assignments by State Government."
38. Hence, we find that said Committee, if allowed to function, may result in curbing the wrong practices and lead to inculcating the desired responsibility and transparency in the administration of various departments of the State. We are aware that such Committee will be initially more of curative nature but it may also act as a preventive measure. But the necessary departmental inquiries or prosecutions will be by the conventional procedure. When unwilling parties are forced to act like this, these measures may be defeated by the interested intelligent beneficiaries. More effective and potent legislation is warranted and even wrongful loss to taxpayers caused by such conspirators must be recovered from present or past officers and office bearers.
39. Before proceeding to pass any orders or issue any directions, we direct the State Government to take appropriate ::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 ::: pil12.16 47 policy decision in respect of initiating enquiries or suitable action against retiring / resigning employees for their collective or individual liabilities or role, and doing away with limitation therefor; within next four months. The retirements, superannuation or relinquishment of services by the government employees from the departments where there are grievances of such a nature or collusion, hereafter shall be subject to such decision of the State Government or then, subject to further orders of this Court in this respect.
JUDGE JUDGE
*GS/dragon.
::: Uploaded on - 29/09/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 30/09/2018 02:10:02 :::