Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
New Delhi the 3rd May, 2012.
Subject: Guidelines for checking delay in grant of sanction for prosecution.
Attention is invited to this Department’s OMs No. 399/33/2006-AVD-III dated 6th November, 2006 and 20th December, 2006 on the subject mentioned above.
2. In terms of above instructions, the Competent Authority has to formulate its tentative views regarding the action to be taken on the request of the Investigating Agency and seek the advice of the CVC in the matter. The instructions further lay down that CVC would tender its advice within 10 days to the concerned administrative Ministry/Department, which shall finalise its view in the matter and issue orders accordingly. The instructions also lay down that the administrative Ministry/Department shall refer the case to CVC for reconsideration only in exceptional cases when new facts come to light and that CVC would render appropriate advice to the competent authority based on the findings of the expert committee, within a fortnight and that if the CVC on reconsideration advises for grant of sanction, the concerned Ministry/Department will issue the requisite orders immediately. The instructions further lay down that if the concerned administrative Ministry/Department proposes not to accept the reconsidered advice of the CVC, the case will be referred to DoP&T for final decision and that the DoP&T shall decide the case within 3 weeks and convey its decision to the concerned Ministry/Department.
3. Government constituted a Group of Ministers (GoM), on 6th January, 2011 with the approval of the Prime Minister, to consider measures that can be taken by the Government to tackle corruption. One of the terms of reference (ToR) of the GoM was to consider and advise on – Fast tracking of all cases of public servants accused of corruption”. The Group of Ministers, while considering this ToR, observed that it is imperative that cases of sanction for prosecution should be decided expeditiously and within the timeframe of 3 months. The GoM, therefore, recommended that:-
(a) In all cases where the Investigating Agency has requested sanction for prosecution and also submitted a draft charge sheet and related documents along with the request, it will be mandatory for the competent authority to take a decision within a period of 3 months from receipt of request, and pass a Speaking Order, giving reasons for this decision.
(b) In the event that the competent authority refuses permission for sanction to prosecute, it will have to submit its order including reasons for refusal, to the next higher authority for information within 7 days. Wherever the Minister-in-charge of the Department is the competent authority and he decides to deny the permission, it would be incumbent on the Minister to submit, within 7 days of passing such order denying the permission, to the Prime Minister for information.
(c) It will be the responsibility of the Secretary of each Department/Ministry to monitor all cases where a request has been made for permission to prosecute. Secretaries may also submit a certificate every month to the Cabinet Secretary to the effect that no case is pending for more than 3 months, the reasons for such pendency and the level where it is pending may also be explained.
4. The said recommendation of the GoM has been accepted by Government with the approval of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has also directed that in cases of disagreement where the competent authority proposes to disagree with the investigating agency/CVC, the matter shall be referred to DoP&T and DoP&T’s views in such cases must be communicated to the Competent Authority within such time as would enable the competent authority to pass the final speaking order within a period of three months.
5. As mentioned in para 2 above, the extant instructions have specified clear timelines for each stage of processing of such requests which also includes a period of three weeks for the DoP&T to finalise its views in cases of disagreement referred to it.
6. Accordingly, the above recommendations of the GoM as accepted by the Government and the instructions of the Prime Minister regarding timely communication of DoP&T’s views in disagreement cases are brought to the notice of all Ministries/Departments for strict compliance.
7. As already pointed out in para 2(v) of this Department’s OM dated 6th November, 206, the responsibility of processing cases for sanction prosecution within the time limits laid down shall continue to remain with the administrative Ministries/ Departments.
8. All Ministries/Departments shall henceforth ensure –
(a) Strict compliance with the above procedure and timelines for sanctioning prosecution of public servants;
(b) Submission of a certificate every month by the Secretary of each Ministry/Department to the Cabinet Secretary to the effect that no case is pending for more than 3 months and wherever a case is pending for more than 3 months, the reasons for such pendency and the level where it is pending;
(c) Submission of disagreement cases, where the competent authority proposes to disagree with CVC, to the DoP&T giving at least three weeks time for DoP&T to finalise its views and communicate the same to the competent authority; and
(d) Submission of copies of orders refusing sanction to prosecute to the next higher authority (Prime Minister, in case of an order passed by a Minister-in-charge of a Ministry/Department), within seven days.
Deputy Secretary to the Government of India
Tel. No. 23094637
1. All Ministries/Departments of Government of India as per standard list.
2. Prime Minister’s Office, South Block, New Delhi.
3. NIC, DoP&T for uploading on the website of the Department.
(i) Secretary, Central Vigilance Commission, Satarkata Bhawan, New Delhi.
(ii) Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, North Block, New Delhi.
(iii) Others as per standard list.
Deputy Secretary to the Government of India
Guidelines For Checking Delay In Grant Of Sanction For Prosecution (193.4 KiB, 1,676 hits)
corruption flows from top to bottom. if leaders set example by being clean, transparent & straight forward, there will be fear. unfortunately, it is the politicians – minsters, MLAs & MPs who are the root cause of all corruption. instead of solving the problem & weeding out corruption at the source level, such guidelines hamper work even further.
yatha raja, thatha praja. first cleanse the country of all corrupt politicians, automatically results will follow.
is there any history of prosecution of any minster ?? so where does all corruption start??