Vigilance clearance in case of minor penalty of censure
Tarun
(Querist) 29 May 2014
This query is : Resolved
As per The Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965, there is a provision of imposing of the following Minor Penalties
(i) censure;
(ii) withholding of his promotion;
(iii) recovery from his pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused by him to the Government by negligence or breach of orders;
(iiia) reduction to a lower stage in the time-scale of pay by one stage for a period not exceeding three years, without cumulative effect and not adversely affecting his pension.
(iv) withholding of increments of pay;
But, as per the the O.M. No.11012/11/2007-Estt. (A) dated 14.12.2007, according to Para-7 which reads as under :
"7. Vigilance clearance will not normally be granted for a period of three years after the currency of the punishment, if a minor penalty has been imposed on an officer."
My query is :
If an officer has been imposed with a minor penalty of "Censure", then as per the above mentioned provision, it seems that he will not be granted Vigilance clearance for three years and if his promotion is due but the same is not awarded due to lack of vigilance clearance then it amounts to withholding of promotion.
Please clarify whether (i) the officer awarded 'Censure' can be denied vigilance clearance for three years or not?
(ii) If vigilance clearance is denied in the above case, for the purpose of promotion, then what is the difference between Censure and withholding of promotion?
Guest
(Expert) 29 May 2014
Have you read para-1 of the letter carefully? Do you find in that para if these instructions are meant for vigilance clearance for promotion purposes?
By the way, being a student, how you are concerned with the issue?
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 29 May 2014
Author,
Reply the query raised by the expert PS Dhingra ji.
Tarun
(Querist) 30 May 2014
Thanx a lot for your quick reply to my query.
One of my friend's elder brother is in Govt. service and was very depressed since his department was not responding to his queries. But one of the source in the Department informed him that due to this order of 2007, the department has not sought vigilance clearance in his case of promotion. Though another clarification issued through O.M. dated 2008 clarified that the term empanelment does not cover cases of promotion but the Department is of another view. Hence a clarification was needed. Again, Thanx a lot Dhingra Sir. "You are Great and perfect".
Guest
(Expert) 30 May 2014
You are welcome and thanks for your appreciation also.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 31 May 2014
It is nice to see that you have been properly advised due to which you were able to clarify your query at your own source.
