An SAG (Senior
Administrative Grade) officer was nominated as evaluator for the departmental promotion
examination from Group C to Group B Gazetted. As it happens, the eligibility is
laid down as to who all can apply/compete. Certain eligible employees (three to
be exact) were on deputation to Vigilance wing of Railways. As the luck would
have it, they failed to qualify the written test. This perhaps bruised their ego
little too deep.
Now hear this:
One day I came to know that the Vigilance team wants to confiscate the
answer sheets (around 250) of this particular exam. The exam having been over,
result declared and successful candidates having joined, there was apparently
no objection in parting with the answer sheets. As per SOP Vigilance is
supposed to have some complaint anonymous or by name to take this action, not a
difficult feat if vested interest is involved. An authorisation from a middle
manager of Vigilance is sufficient to ask for such ‘papers’ The answer sheets
were handed over and apparently the three Vigilance Inspectors who failed to
qualify the written exam scanned the answer sheets under a fine microscope. In
bureaucracy, as in any other similar set up it is not impossible to come across
‘errors’ which can be magnified and interpreted as malafide.
Promptly a detailed
Questionnaire was given to me asking all kinds of related and not so related
questions about the evaluation. Inter-alia it was pointed out to Vigilance:
A: Essay type answers are purely on the discretion
of the evaluating officer and no bias can be attributed as the answer sheets
are given coded numbers, thus, the evaluator cannot know whose answer sheet
he/she is evaluating.
B: The Evaluator (that’s me) has been evaluating
answer sheets for the last 10 years and never a finger is pointed towards the
sanctity of his evaluation.
This provoked Vigilance
to the extent that they just forgot all about issues raised in item A above but
concentrated on item B, with the result they combed an earlier selection with a
very fine comb and came out with again some silly inconsequential ‘errors’ (malafide
for them)
In my reply I was
supported by my General Manager who wrote notes after notes endorsing my stand.
The SDGM (The Vigilance Lord) is not bound to accept GM’s opinion/directions.
As per procedure he can put his counter observation and forward the case with
his recommendations to the Ministry, where the concerned Member also gives his
observation / recommendations and the case is sent to Central Vigilance
Commissioner through the Chairman who generally signs on the dotted lines. So
within a year, not one but two major penalty chargesheets were served to me,
just when I had 4 months to superannuate. They had cleverly given one
chargesheet for each of the two examinations. By then I was working on a
higher, independent post as the Head of the Deptt.
As the saying goes if you
are visiting Simla, the hills start from Kalka onwards. So, your fun trip
begins from Kalka onward, in the sense fun journey begins. Similarly, once you
are served with chargesheet major or minor your torture, harassment and
humiliation begin…you may eventually be found ‘Not Guilty’ and absolved of all
the charges but not before arduous three years of running around, painfully
slow inquiry with taareekh par taareekh.
The mental tension and physical pain I went through cannot be put in
words. Reams of paper was used by me to draft my reply, modify reply, (I had
sleepless nights week after week) consultation with senior sympathetic officers,
astrologers, organising suggested Pooja and visits to temples. Every one though
agreed that it is baseless and will not stand the scrutiny of court…but I was
in no mental condition to undergo humiliation of silly, time-consuming Inquiry/court
proceedings. I was very well familiar with their working in my thirty plus
years of service. Since I was under shadow so I could not conduct exams nor
could I hold independent post. Promptly, I was drafted for one training after another.
Imagine you have two months to retire and the organization sends you for
training. But that suited me, it was better than to be on ‘forced leave’
During one such training in Delhi I visited an old colleague and
explained my case to him, he was convinced and took me to the officer whose
section was dealing with the case. This kindly officer saw the thick wand of
papers in my hand and indicated towards pile of files lying helter skelter in
his chamber ‘these are all replies, like of which you are carrying, some of
them are several years old and simply gathering dust here. None has time and
patience to read them, much less, dispense ‘justice’ after going through them.
What is it you want:
To pursue the case, come what may and have the (ego)
satisfaction of being found Not Guilty after three to five years of running
around
OR
Get rid of the case. And forget all about it. I
confided in him that I have no pretension of pride, of what use is my ego/pride
which will take torturous journey and harassment of 3 to 5 years before the
conclusion. The kindly officer suggested me a path.
I met my Member and
shared with him my desire to ‘admit’ charges. He looked surprised and asked me
You know the meaning of this? you may be given some penalty. I replied in
affirmative and informed him I have no physical energy and mental make up to
pursue the case, so better it is to admit and be done with it. With the help of
same very kindly officer I drafted my confession and after a week I was ‘let
off’ with a lightest possible penalty. I am forever grateful to understanding
and helping people in this chain.
I cannot describe in words the feeling of great
relief.
TAKE AWAYS:
1. My senior officer to whom I was showing my replies to the
questionnaire and who was fine tuning my reply, when his remarks were called
upon officially on the file, he did not write a word in my favour rather wrote
beautiful English (English, of which he so often declared to have mastery over)
hurting my cause.
2. Another officer ‘friend’ I looked upon for help due to
his posting in Vigilance Commission, though much junior to me stopped taking my
calls.
3. Well! Vigilance Inspectors, I can understand but alas
even Vigilance Head refused to see reason and was so very easily swayed by the
perverse PE (Preliminary Enquiry)
4. I knew from the very beginning that mine was not the
first case nor was it going to be the last one, so I suggested to the ‘Rule
Maker friends’ to bring an amendment thereby temporarily debarring all those
candidates who are on deputation and once back in their ‘parent’ cadre they
could participate in very next selection and if qualify would be given
seniority from the date they were eligible, while on deputation to avoid this kind
of bravado involving loss of peace and face. But they gave me looks you give to
a salesman who is trying to sell you something which you have already decided
in your mind not to buy but for courtesy sake hearing him out.
These are few of the innumerable examples, when I
met ‘friends in power and position’ forget any help, they looked other way.
As the saying goes when you are down and under the
passers-by also love to kick you.
You laugh the world laughs with you; you cry and you
cry alone
No comments:
Post a Comment