VIGILANCE
SETUP IN CPWD
The CPWD has
a track record which is clean. The systems in the department, the checks and
balances that are in place ensure that the works are executed properly and within
the framework of rules and regulations. Preventive vigilance also plays an
important part in this. This is carried out by the Vigilance wing of CPWD.
Set up of Vigilance Unit in CPWD:
The Vigilance Unit is headed by a Chief Engineer
(Vigilance) with 3 Superintending Engineers(Vigilance) for investigation of
cases and follow-up action and one Superintending Engineer(Inquiry) to conduct
the inquiry proceedings.
The 3 SE’s(Vig) are assisted by 10 Executive
Engineers(Vig.) for investigation of cases and 3 Engineer
Officers(Disciplinary) for presenting the departmental cases before the Inquiry
Officer, as well as for the follow up action on the Inquiry Officer’s reports.
Besides, each Executive Engineer has one Assistant
Engineer to assist him.
There are also two Sections, each headed by a Section
Officer to assist the Vigilance Unit in all secretarial work.
Contact
details of the Vigilance wing are:
Chief Engineer Vigilance---
Room No. 135 ‘A’, Nirman bhawan, New Delhi Tele:23792114, FAX:23012350
SE(Vigilance-1)
Tele:23012248
SE(Vigilance-2)
Tele:23792483
SE(E)(Vigilance)Tele:23019284
SE(Inquiry)
Tele:23017640
VIGILANCE FUNCTIONS
Role of Vigilance Unit
The role of Vigilance Unit is
brought out in the Vigilance Manual Vol.I, Chapter I, para 3.1, as follows:
To act
as a special assistant to the Secretary of the Ministry as well as the DG(W) in
all matters pertaining to vigilance unit, and provide a link between the
Ministry/Department and CVC.
·
To
conduct regular and surprise inspections of sensitive spots.
·
To
review and streamline procedures which appear to afford scope for corruption or
mis-conduct.
·
To
initiate measures for the prevention, detention and punishment of corruption
and other mal-practices in the department.
CBI/ACB
Matters relating to bribery,
cheating, criminal breach of trust,possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income,
allegations where truth cannot be ascertained without making inquiries from
non-official persons or those involving examination of non-government records,
books of accounts etc. are investigated by the CBI or the Anti-Corruption
Bureau. Where they decide to prosecute the cases through criminal courts,
necessary prosecution sanctions are accorded by the Department/Ministry, after
considering the merits of the case.At
times, the CBI/ACB also send us their investigation reports along with draft
charge sheets for initiating departmental proceedings against the charged
officers.
Definition of Vigilance Angle
The CVC has vide its circular
004/VGL/18 dated
CPWD
All other cases involving vigilance matters are
investigated by the Vigilance Unit.The
Vigilance Unit takes up only those cases where Group `A’ and/or `B’ officers
are involved.If any Group `C’ or Group
`D’ official is linked with the gazetted officers in any of the cases, they are
also taken up by the Vigilance Unit.
Processing of Complaints
The complaints reach the Vigilance Unit from individuals
within the department or outside the department, either directly or through the
PMO/CVC/Ministry. At times, the complaints are also made by firms, contractors,
or some organisations. Those complaints which are anonymous or pseudonymous in
nature are simply closed as per CVC’s instructions.In respect of other complaints, the
comments/reports are sought from the concerned Chief Engineers.Those complaints, where Chief Engineers
emphatically report that there is no vigilance angle, are not pursued and are
closed.Only those cases where lapses
pointed out in the complaints are prima-facie established are taken up for
investigation.
At times the complaints are received directly from our own
officers in the department, or from other departments for whom CPWD is
executing any work. Such complaints are taken up directly for investigation.
Once the case is taken up for investigation, the relevant
records and reports are sought from the concerned units.If, on the basis of these reports and
records, no lapses are established against any officer, the cases are closed.
If lapses are established against any officer, their
explanations are sought, and based on their explanations, additional records
and reports as required are sought from the concerned units, and a detailed
investigation report is prepared.
In case no lapse is established after detailed
investigation, the case is closed.Otherwise, the investigation reports are sent to the Ministry with due
recommendations where Group `A’ Officers are concerned, and directly to CVC
where only officers upto Group `B’ are involved, for obtaining first stage
advice of CVC.
The entire procedure from the receipt of the complaint
upto final disposal is detailed below.
VIGILANCE PROCEDURES FOLLOWED IN CPWD:
1.Disciplinary
Authority
(i)DG(W) is the disciplinary authority for group' 8 officers,
while the MoUD is for group' A' officers.
(ii)The MoUD is the disciplinary authority in the case of all
retired officers, irrespective of their groups.
2. Preliminary
investigation
(i) Anonymous
and pseudonymous complaints are simply filed in the light of the recent
directions from the CVC.
(ii) In the case of genuine complaints, a preliminary investigation
is done by calling for the relevant records and report/comments on the
complaint from the concerned Chief Engineers.
(iii) If prima facie lapses are established against any of the
officers, detailed Investigation is taken up.
3. Detailed
investigation
(i)Additional
records as required are called for detailed investigation.
(ii)The explanations of the defaulting officers are called on the
lapses identified against them.
(iii) If after detailed investigation, it is found that there is no
case against any of the officers, the cases are closed at the CE(V)'s level
where only group '8 and below officers are involved. If any group' A"
officer is involved, detailed investigation report (IR) is sent to MoUD, duly
approved by CE(V) recommending closure.
4. First
stage CVC advice
(i) If after detailed investigation, lapses are found against any
of the officers, the IR is prepared and sent to CVC directly, where only group'
8' and below officers are involved, and through MoUD where any group' A'
officer is involved. The IR is sent with appropriate recommendations for
initiating disciplinary proceedings, as duly approved by the DG (W).
(ii) The CVC, in their first stage advice, may advise closure of the
case, issue of caution memo, or for initiating minor or major disciplinary
proceedings against the defaulting officers, as the case may be.
5. Disciplinary
proceedings
(i) Where a caution memo is advised by the CVC, a second
opportunity is given to the charged officer (CO) to explain his position.
Thereafter, the caution memo is issued to him in case his explanation is not
considered satisfactory. This caution memo is issued by the next superior
authority in the Vigilance Unit, or by the ADG(S&P)/DG(W), as the case may
be.
(ii) Minor or major penalty charge sheets, as advised by the CVC, are
served on the charged officers by the appropriate disciplinary authority. The
draft charge sheets are prepared by the Vigilance Unit and approved by the
CE(V).
6. Minor
penalty proceedings
(i) On receipt of the reply to the charge sheet from the CO, the
case is put up to the DG(W) in the case of group' 8' officers, for his final
orders.
(ii) In case the DG(W) is not inclined to impose any of the minor
penalties, the case has to be referred to the CVC for reconsideration of their
advice, and further action taken accordingly.
7. Major
penalty proceedings
(i) In case the CO accepts the charges, the case is put up to the
disciplinary authority and the above procedure as under minor penalty proceedings
is followed, for issue of final orders.
(ii) In case the charges are denied by the CO, 10/PO are appointed by
the appropriate disciplinary authority to conduct the inquiry. Inquiry is
conducted either by the CDI/CVC, or by the departmental officer, as advised by
the CVC in their first stage advice. The SE (Inquiry), or one of the retired
senior officers in the panel duly approved by the CVC, is appointed as 10 in
the case of depar1mental inquiry.
8. Second stage CVC advice
(i) On receipt of the 10's report after the conclusion of the
inquiry proceedings, the comments on the 10's report are prepared by the
Vigilance Unit, and are sent to the CVC directly for their second stage advice
in case of group' B' or below officers, and through the MoUD in case of group'
A' officers. The comments are sent duly approved by the DG(W).
(ii) The CVC, in their second stage advice, may either advice closure
of the case, or issue of caution memo, or imposition of a suitable minor or
major penalty on the charged officers, as the case may be.
(iii) In the case of CVC advice for dropping of charges, or for issue
of caution memo, the final orders are issued by the appropriate disciplinary
authority.
(iv) In the case of CVC advice for imposition of a minor or major
penalty, a copy of the 10's repor1 along with a copy of second stage advice
from CVC, are sent to the CO for his comments.
(v) Detailed comments are prepared by the Vigilance Unit on the
reply received from the CO, and are put up to the DG(W) for final orders in the
case of group '8' officers. Where the DG(W) is not inclined to impose the
penalty advised by the CVC, the case has to be referred back to the CVC for his
reconsideration, and thereafter the final orders are to be issued accordingly.
(vi) In the case of group' A' officers, the comments on the CO's
reply, with due recommendations for final orders, as duly approved by the
DG(W), , are sent to the MoUD for issue of final orders.
9. Appeals
(i) MoUD is the Appellate Authority in case of appeals from group'
B' officers against the final orders issued by the DG(W).
(ii) Where an
appeal is preferred by the CO, the comments on the appeal are prepared by the
Vigilance Unit, and are forwarded to the MoUD, with due recommendations, as
approved by the DG(W), for issue of orders.
(iii)
There is, however, no appeal
against the orders issued by the President of India, i.e. the MoUD for and on
behalf of the President of India. In such cases, the CO can only represent for
the review of the orders.
10. Review
(i) MoUD, for and on behalf of the President of India, is the
reviewing authority for group' A' & '8' officers, and for all retired
officers.
(ii) Comments on the representation of the CO for review of the
orders of the appellate authority (or for the orders issued by the MoUD), are
prepared by the Vigilance Unit, and are sent to the MoUD with due
recommendations, as approved by the DG(W), for issue of orders.
(iii)Review petitions are normally entertained only when there is new
material or evidence which could not be produced, or was not available at the
time of passing the orders under review, and which has the effect of changing
the nature of the case, is brought to notice by the CO.
Time frame
The time taken depends upon the receipt of records,
reports, and comments from the field units, as well as the explanations of the
defaulting officers.This time varies
from as little as 2-3 months to as much as 2-3 years.Since the vigilance proceedings are quasi
judicial in nature, a detailed case has to be made out and based on the
relevant documents and statements, so that the charge sheet can be sustained
during the inquiry proceedings. Once a charge sheet is issued, it is not possible
to add any new documents or evidence during inquiry proceedings and as such the
investigation report is to be carefully prepared if the charge sheet is to be
sustained.
Since the papers have to be routed through the Ministry,
CVC, UPSC, and at times even the DoPTthe whole process, right from the time of receipt of complaint upto the
final disposal in the case of a Group `A’ officer can, therefore, take as much
as 5 years.
Priority is being given to disposal of old cases. The main
reason for delay in the investigation of cases is due to non-receipt of
records, reports, and information/comments from the field units. In a few
cases, the complaints were received in Vigilance Unit at a belated stage, when
the concerned units were already closed, and the records etc. were transferred
to other units, thereby leading to delay in locating the records.
Quarterly
review is held by the Chief Engineer(Vig) with the SEs(V) and their EEs(V) and
EOs(D) to sort out the bottlenecks and toy fix targets for the next quarter
after reviewing the progress achieved vis-ŕ-vis the targets in the previous
quarter.
LAPSES NOTICED BY THE VIGILANCE
WING DURING ITS INVESTIGATIONS
i)
Appointment
of Consultants without approval of the competent authority
i)
Splitting
up of works by approving work orders to the same agency, at the same rates, and
on the same date.
ii)
Tenders
issued to contractors without valid registration.
iii)
Acceptance/recommendation
for acceptance of tenders at rates above prevalent rates.
iv)
Issue
of tender documents to ineligible contractors, and suppressing the information
to higher authorities while forwarding the tender documents.
v)
Recall
of tenders without approval of competent authority, leading to award of works
at higher rates.
vi)
Issue
of work orders far beyond the permissible annual limits.
vii)
Call
of tenders without wide publicity.
viii)
Interpolation
of rates after opening of tenders
ix)
Award
of works at higher rates without proper justification.
i)
Payment
of secured advances for materials in excess of quantity stipulated in the
contract, even though there is practically no change in the scope of work.
ii)
Execution
of substandard woks inspite of objections from higher authorities, including QC
units e.g. Grit wash plaster, cement concrete flooring and plastering work,
poor quality of steel centering and shuttering for RCC works resulting in honey
combing, improper line levels in RCC works, etc.
iii)
Passing
of bills without mandatory test checks of measurements.
iv)
Non-renewal
of bank guarantee in time.
v)
Large
scale deviations of work without approval of the competent authority.
vi)
Non-execution
of ALR items to its full requirement in the contract, and getting the same
executed through another contract.
vii)
Execution
of works without AA&ES and technical sanction, by charging the expenditure
to various ARMO works.
viii)
Huge
deviations in execution of AHR items without prior approval of competent
authority.
ix)
Record
of completion certificates without pointing out the defects for which reduced
rate items were initiated.Defects were
not pointed out at appropriate time during execution and no notice was issued
for rectification of defects before initiating RR items.
i)
Handing
over of cheque to a person without proper authorization.
i) Procurement of stores from unauthorized cooperative stores,
and at higher rates.
(i)Splitting
of AR&MO works into multiple tenders.