Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 179

7.23 Safeguards against victimization.- (proposed section 1.- Sub-section (1) of proposed section 10 required the Central Government to ensure that no person who has made a disclosure under section 3 (2) of the Act is 'victimized' by initiation of any proceedings or 104 otherwise made on the ground that such person had made a disclosure under this Act.

This Sub-section and other sub-sections of section 10 have to read along with the definition of victimization in section 2 (i) which refers to 'victimization' in the case of all government servant other than a Minister.

Sub-section (2) of proposed section 10 states that if any 'person' other than a Minister is aggrieved by any action on the ground that he is being victimized due to the fact that he had filed a complaint.

Under sub-Section 3, he may file an application before the Competent Authority seeking redress in the matter. It will be noticed that the word 'person' will obviously include a pubic servant (other than a Minister) or any person who is not a public servant and may also include a NonGovernmental Organization.

Sub-section (3) of proposed section 10 states that an application under sub-section (2) of section 10, the Competent Authority may, after making such inquiry as it deems fit, give appropriate directions as it may consider necessary, to the concerned public servant or public authority against whom the allegations of victimization have been proved.

We are also view that there should be a proviso to above sub-section (3) stating that where the Competent Authority is of the opinion that the 105 allegation of victimization is not true or is not maintainable for the reason that the action alleges to cause hardship is not relatable to the complaint is to subject matter, it may dismiss the application.

This provision has to be read along with section 14, which relates to burden of proof.

Sub-section (4) of the proposed section 10 states that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the power to give directions under sub-section (3), in relation to a public servant, shall include the power to direct the restoration of the public servant making the disclosure, to the status quo ante.

We have proposed that this power to restore the public servant to the status quo ante should be vested in the Competent Authority and that where public servants have to be restored back into service or the other acts of victimization have to be nullified, it will be desirable to enable the Competent Authority to issue directions to the concerned disciplinary authorities referred to in other Acts, Rules, Codes, or Regulations applicable to the public servant. It will not be a necessary for the public servant, to invoke the jurisdiction the Central Administrative Tribunal or any other appropriate body for relief and that is why we have introduced a non-obstante clause at the opening of the section.

Sub-section (5) of the proposed section 10 enables the Competent Authority to issue directions to prevent the conduct or victimization continuing or occurring in the future. There are similar provisions in other countries.

Sub-section (6) of the proposed section 10 states that every direction given by the Competent Authority shall be binding upon the public servant or the public authority against whom the allegation of victimization has been proved.

Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informers Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
Powered and driven by Neosys Inc