news details |
|
|
| Info Deptt needs policy, organizational overhaul | | Breeding corruption, nepotism | |
EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Feb 15: Grappling with the problems of nepotism, blatant favouritism and "dis"information since long, the state information department (SID) is in dire need of an immediate overhauling for its "smooth and flawless" functioning.
Flouting all norms, the department heads have allegedly been giving unfair advantages to their juniors that they like best with impunity from law.
In December 2009, SID director Farooq Ahmad Renzu ordered promotion of Surinder from qatib to TPO (teleprinter operator), allegedly ignoring department's seniority list.
Even as Surinder fell at No 4 in the list, he was benefitted by the director, bypassing the seniority of others.
Sources in SID said as per SRO 93 of the recruitment rules of information department, a qatib could be promoted as an exhibition assistant or information assistant, but not as a TPO. So, apart from ignoring the seniority list by ordering Surinder's promotion, the director also allegedly flouted SRO 93, the sources added.
Sources said Surinder's promotion directly affected Pritam Saini, who fell at No 1 in the list, as Sham Lal at No 2 had already retired, while Romesh, who was 3rd in seniority, was promoted as TPO.
However, a month after ordering Surinder's promotion, Renzu "admitted" that Pritam was senior and also wrote a letter to principal secretary, information department, in this regard.
In his letter dated January 28, 2010, he said "while going through the records, it has been revealed that Pritam Saini is senior to clerk-cum-librarian (CCL), Sham Lal."
In his this order, the director himself "indirectly" admitted that Pritam was also senior to Surinder, who stood at No 4 while Sham was No 2 in seniority.
Not only this, the department seniority list was also allegedly changed in 2005, when Renzu was director, to benefit the "blue-eyed". In the changed seniority list, Pritam was shown at No 5 and Sham at No 1. Renzu, however, later sought to rectify the mistake by issuing a separate order, which said Pritam was senior to Sham Lal.
Sources said the list was allegedly changed by the then joint director S K Sharma against whom a case was filed in the high court by the aggrieved employees more than three years back.
Sources said the director could not order any promotion till the case challenging the 'allegedly changed seniority list' was pending in the court.
Sources said in Kathua office of SID also, a junior assistant was given two promotions in 1995 and adjusted as information assistant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
