GUIDELINES FOR CHECKING DELAYS INGRANTOF SANCTION OF PROSECUTION
— STRICT COMPLIANCE THEREOF.
of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
of Personnel & Training
Block, New Delhi-110001.
the 20th July, 2012.
Subject:- Guidelines for checking delays ingrantof sanction of prosecution
— strict compliance thereof.
Attention is invited to this Department’s O.M. Nos.
399/33/2006-AVD.III dated 06.11.2006 & 20.12.2006 and O.M.
No.372/19/2012-AVD.III dated 03.05.2012 on the subject cited above.
In a recent meeting taken by Secretary (Personnel) to review the cases
for sanction of prosecution against public servants pending with various
Ministries/Departments, the following issues emerged:-
It was noted that in a significant no. of cases pertaining to banks and PSUs
etc., the Disciplinary Authorities decline the sanction and thereafter seek
advice of CVC. This is in clear violation of DOP&T’s instructions issued
vide O.M. 399/33/2006-AVD.III dated 06.11.2006 wherein it is stipulated that
the competent authority shall take a tentative view regarding the action to be
taken and seek advice of CVC in the’ matter and on receipt of the advice from
the CVC, the concerned Ministry / Department shall finalize its views. It is
reiterated that before passing orders on requests for sanction for prosecution,
the instructions issued by this Department are strictly adhered to.
It was also noticed that various Ministries / Departments do not adhere to the
stipulated time limit. It is imperative that the stipulated time limit must be
strictly adhered to. The guidelines issued by DOPT vide O.M. No.
399/33/2006-AVD-III dated 06.11.2006 & 20.12.2006, have recently
been modified vide O.M. No. 372/19/2012-AVD.III dated 03.05,2012 to
empower the disciplinary authority to take final view in such matters within
three months and that in disagreement cases DOPT’s advice would be taken into
account before passing final orders.
Protractedcorrespondencemade by the Administrative Ministries
with the CBI/CVC for clarifications/reconsideration, etc. are strictly not
necessary and disciplinary authority can, in most cases, take a decision on the
basis of records which are available with it. As per the extant instructions,
the Disciplinary Authority should not entertain representations from
individuals themselves as this would be an endless process which often delays
the matter andresults innon-adherence to the prescribedtime linesfor processingsuch cases. This Department’s
instruction dated 6th November, 2006 has clearly stated that the concerned
Ministry/Department shall refer the case to CVC for reconsideration only in
exceptional cases when new facts come to light.
The administrative Departments should avoid making repeated references to the
CVC for reconsideration of their advice and, in all cases where they propose todisagreewith the advice given by CVC, the
matter should be promptly referred to the DoP&T (as a disagreement case),
seeking DoP&T’s views in the matter.
Wherever, the disagreement cases are referred to DoP&T for views/ advice
and once DoP&T gives its views, the Disciplinary Authority may have to take
a considered final decision, keeping in view the advice given by DoP&T. The
instructions contained in this Department’s O.Ms dated 06.11.2006 and
20.12.2006, as modified O.M. dated 03.05.2012 in this regard shall be compiled
with strictly by all Ministries/Departments.