High Court disapproves ‘rampant adhocism’ in engineering deptts ‘HoDs have developed vested interest in stop-gap arrangement; No one in the Government has the will to stem the rot’ Srinagar, Mar 19: In a strong embarrassment for the state government, Jammu and Kashmir High Court has observed that adhocism plagues functioning of most of the engineering departments in the state. Disapproving stop-gap, adhoc and incharge arrangements being made by the state government, the High Court has observed that this malaise affects the public works department the most. Disposing of a writ petition titled Jaffar Hassan Samoon versus the state and others, single bench of Justice Hasnain Massodi observed that the officers at the level of administrative heads and the offices of chief engineers of Hydraulic and Roads and Buildings and UEED, appear to have developed a vested interest in adhocism so that way is paved for making stop-gap promotions and postings with least regard for seniority and in the process these officers resort to favoritism. The court has observed that the officers at different levels are pushed to endless litigations and “instead of devoting their time to designing and supervision of projects of pubic importance, these officers are forced to spend time in making rounds of the courts of law.” The court has regretted that the officers in the administrative department have enough time to make frequent transfers— mostly premature and against transfer policy of 2010, but have no time to end adhocism in the department. “The situation has deteriorated to such an extent that a chief engineer holds the post of an assistant engineer on substantive basis and a superintending engineer that of a junior engineer. No one appears to have the will to stem the rot.” The judgment directs the Chief Secretary to take notice of the rot in the Public Works Department (PWD) at the secretariat level and at the level of the offices of the Chief Engineers. The court has also taken strong note of frequent transfers in the works divisions, which according to it triggers avoidable litigations. The CS has been asked to direct an in-depth study of functioning of the departments namely Roads and Buildings, Public Health Engineering, Urban Environmental Engineering and Irrigation and Flood Control, to find out the number of transfer orders of engineers at the different levels issued, withdrawn, modified, revoked during 2013, litigation triggered by such frequent transfers mostly premature and in violation of the transfer policy as also the litigation costs borne by the state exchequer to defend such transfer orders.” “The survey is bound to pinpoint gross misallocation of time and resources in the departments, under scrutiny. It would lay bare the reasons for aversion of the officers at the helm of affairs to make promotions on substantive basis in accordance with the rules and lack of will to set right the problem that has assumed monstrous proportions.” Interestingly, a division bench comprising Justice Hasnain Massodi and Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur on March 10 while passing orders on an LPA titled Abdul Majid Khan versus State, involving a similar controversy, expressed disappointment over the status report filed by the government, charging it with taking no steps to end the adhocism in the department. The DB order reads: “It is a matter of concern that Commissioner Secretary Public Works (R&B) Department, oblivious to disapproval recorded by the court in various writ petitions from time to time, regarding incharge, stop-gap and adhoc promotions in the department and repeated directions to avoid such promotions and to make promotions on substantive basis, continues to make promotions on incharge or stop-gap basis.” The court while referring to the promotion order in question, noted that the officers placed as Incharge Superintending Engineers did not hold post of Executive Engineers on substantive basis. “We record our displeasure for brazen violation of the observations made by this court from time to time while dealing with the grievance regarding stop-gap and incharge promotions. We reiterate that adhoc/stop-gap promotions are only an exception to be resorted to in exceptional circumstances because of administrative exigencies. However, in Public Works Department, it is being used as a matter of practice pushing officers to avoidable litigation.” While directing the Commissioner Secretary, Public Works Department to explain the disregard shown to such observations, the division bench said: “We once again direct the respondents to desist from adhoc/stop-gap/incharge promotions.”
Posted on: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 22:12:03 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015