news details |
|
|
| Court takes serious note SVO functioning | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Apr 30: Special judge anti-corruption A K Koul today took serious note of the functioning of state vigilance organization (SVO) and directed its SSP to register case under relevant
provisions of law against the delinquent officials and submit action taken report within two weeks.
The court directive came in a petition filed by Ram Singh and others, seeking production of status report of the case investigated by SVO in respect of bunglings in Ramsu block of rural development department under national rural employment guarantee scheme.
After hearing both sides and perusal of the record, the judge observed that on the basis of communication of central vigilance office dated September 22, 2009, a joint surprise check was
directed regarding the fraudulent withdrawal of lakhs of rupees from the government treasury under NREGS.
The joint surprise check was conducted and the SVO inquiry officer submitted the report to his SSP.
The inquiry officer concluded that VLW Dhan Singh (secretary panchayat Pannchal) during 2006-2007, had committed fraud in allotment of work to job card holders under NREG scheme.
It was also concluded that the VLW abused his official position and allotted work to the persons who were neither residents of the concerned villages nor had ever worked there, and to facilitate
fraudulent withdrawals, he prepared fake and forged receipts and ultimately managed to embezzle an amount of Rs 96,900. Accordingly, SVO SSP recommended registration of case against the
delinquent officials under section 5(1) (c) (d) read with 5(2) of J&K PC Act and sections 409, 467, 468 and 471 of RPC. Thereafter the track was lost for unknown reasons. A departmental action was
later recommended against Dhan Singh.
The court observed it was really astonishing to notice that prima-facie commission of a number of offences under PC Act and RPC were established but registeration of a case was not permitted by
SVO commissioner. The court observed that as the motion commenced by petitioners
appeared to be rightly conceived, it was allowed.
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
