Money heist!
- Phantom incumbent gets salary against already filled substantive post.
JJ CORRESPONDENT
Jammu, Jun 19: How can a DDO withdraw the salary of two employees on one post? Who is responsible for this heinous financial crime? Why have not the higher authorities of Skill Development Department taken the cognizance of this crime? Who is behind this scam? These are some serious concerns irritating in the mind of people and these should be enquired and identify those who are responsible.
Like many others, Ishrat Ahmad Zargar, Vocational Instructor, Welder, Government ITI, Baghi Dilawer Khan, Srinagar, JKUT was engaged, illegally as a backdoor entry, vide Order No 247of 94 dated 18-03-94 by Deputy Director, Kashmir Province @ Rs 1200, per month, drawing remuneration under “wages” head. He approached High Court to get his remuneration under “salary” head. The Deputy Director, Kashmir, made clear vide letter No. DDK/Estt/2000/778-79 dated 28-10-2000 that no post is available. His writ petition was dismissed.
On the recommendations of Director Technical Education, the government vide order No. 91 Edu (Tech) of 2006 Dated 02-08-2006, granted to such 39 randomly engaged persons, consolidated status against Direct Quota Posts in pursuance of the policy related to such appointments, issued in light of government order No.794.GAD of 2004, Dated 22-08-2004, enhancing their monthly wages to the extent of the minimum of existing pay scale of post (4000-6000) with immediate effect i.e 02-08-2006. Ishrat Ahmad Zargar exists on serial No. 07 of the annexure ‘A’ of the said order. Simultaneously, the directorate shows him on adhoc status against as shown him as consolidated employee in order No.91, from the date of his initial appointment, 18-03-94 in the pay scale of 4000-6000 +DA+HRA+MA. As a consequence, arrears from 06-2004 to 09-2006, of Rs 155,640.00 vide tv no. 12 dated, 03-10-2006. And tv no. 06 dated 09-03-2007 Rs.2,35,196.00 were drawn in his favour by the concerned DDO at ITI Ganderbal through Treasury of Ganderbal. As per DDK’s communication to Directorate with regard to Court case in the matter, as quoted above, no post was available in Kashmir Province in general and Government ITI Ganderbal in particular. Trade was run by already appointed Junior Instructor, Welder. So the question arises, how did then DDO of ITI Ganderbal draw the arrears of Ishrat Ahmad Zargar (Adhoc) against the post already filled and that too without approval from Administrative Department at Secretariat, required for such arrears and how did the concerned Treasury Passed the bill, amounting to lakhs, for payment. In simple words it means to draw the pay against a single post simultaneously for two different persons – one real, one phantom.
In addition to the above, the reliable source told the JJ team, that in March, 2010, the J&K Civil Services (Special Provision) Act, 2010 came into force to provide for regularisation of the employees appointed on adhoc, contractual, consolidated basis. Under it the Empowered Committee was constituted for scrutiny and verification of credentials of such employees with regard to their entitlement to regularisation under this Act. Among others, above discussed subject, Ishrat Ahmad Zargar was proposed by Directorate of Technical Education (Skill Development Department) as Junior Instructor, consolidated, Welder, for regularisation. He was declared eligible in the 46th ECM held on 22-04-2015 & 23-04-2015 at general serial no.15, 38 ECM serial no.09. As provided in the Act itself, the Adm. Deptt. issued orders of regularisation after seeking approval of the Chief Minister in favour of all found eligible by the Empowered Committee. No orders of regularisation were issued in favour of the said Ishrat Ahmad Zargar for the reasons best known to the Adm. Deptt.
When the regularisation orders were not issued and objections were not submitted by the claimant party, he lost his claim for the job. It is to be seen how did the Directorate allow incumbent to continue his services. Under what orders from the govt. (under whose jurisdiction the case falls because the Directorate submitted it to the higher office for consideration of regularisation by Empowered Committee) the DDO draws the salary till date. The same Act of 2010 puts restriction on further adhoc, contractual consolidate appointments. As per the Act no such employee should be left out who completed seven years from his Initial Appointment. In what capacity the incumbent exists on pay rolls. When the case of fraudulent withdrawal of money from state exchequer will be established by any independent agency in the light of above facts, from whose revenue it will be recollected.
Director Skill Development Department is requested to look into the matter using his jurisprudence.
