news details |
|
|
| PSGA Act: 4 years on, no designated officer fined or punished | | | Asif Iqbal Naik
Early Times Report
jammu, May 9: Even though more than four years have been passed since the Government of Jammu and Kashmir published the much hyped Public Service Guarantee Act (PSGA) in its 13th April, 2011 government Gazette, but till date no designated officer has either been fined or punished in any case by the government for not talking his duty seriously in terms of delivery under the designated act.
As per the act, the Act has provision to give the powers of civil courts to the designated officers who in turn have the powers to impose fine up to Rs 10,000 on the defaulting government employee who either fails to provide services or deficient service, beside the act also provides for initiating of departmental action against the defaulting designated officer. However, the irony of the things is that people have neither been made fully aware about the PSGA nor so far no substantial appeals are being filed and perhaps not a single case of imposition of penalty in any department has been reported so far. As per the details available with "Early Times", the Act as passed by the Jammu and Kashmir State Legislature received the assent of the Governor on 9th April, 201 1 and accordingly the act was published in the government gazette on 13th April 2013. The Act was enacted by the government to provide for the delivery of public services to the people of the State within the specified time limit and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto. The definition of this Act in government gazette stated that the designated officer" means an officer notified as such for providing the service under sub-section (2) of section 4 while first appellate authority" means an officer who is designated as such under section 8 ; similarly "second appellate authority" means an officer who is designated as such under section 8 and Special Tribunal" means Special Tribunal constituted under the Jammu and Kashmir Special Tribunal Act, 1988.
The Government under this act from time to time can specify the services to be the public services for purposes of the Act and shall specify the time limit within which such services shall be provided to the eligible persons. in addition, the Government may for different areas and for different services designate officers who shall be responsible for providing each of such services to the eligible persons within the limited time frame which started from the date when an application is submitted by the eligible person for providing of notified service to the designated officer or to a person subordinate to him authorized to receive the application. On receipt of application the designated officer shall within the specified time limit either provide service or reject the application and in case of rejection of application, the designated officer shall record reasons therefore and intimate the same to the applicant.
Under the act any person, whose application has been rejected or who does not receive the public service within the specified time limit, or where the service received by him is deficient in any manner, may prefer to file an appeal to such officer as may be notified by the Government to be the first appellate authority, within thirty days from the date of such rejection or expiry of the time limit or receipt of deficient service, as the case may be, provided that the first appellate authority may admit an appeal after the expiry of the period of thirty days.
Similarly the first appellate authority shall dispose of the appeal within a period of forty-five days from the date of presentation of appeal. The first appellate authority have to direct the designated officer to provide the public service within the such time as it may specify or to remove the deficiency in the service provided to the appellant or pass such other order, including rejection of the appeal, as it may deem fit. The appellate authority will provide an opportunity of being heard to the appellant as well as the designated officer.
Any person aggrieved by the order passed by first appellate authority can prefer an appeal to the second appellate authority within 60 days from the date on which the order appealed against has been passed provided that the second appellate authority may admit an appeal after the expiry of the period of 60 days, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. The second appellate authority within forty-five days from the date of presentation of appeal, can pass an order directing the designated officer to provide the public service within such time as it may specify or to remove the deficiency in the service provided to the appellant or may pass such other order including the rejection of appeal, as it may deem fit.
The appellate authorities while deciding an appeal under the Act, have the same powers as are vested in Civil Court while trying a suit under the Code of Civil Procedure, in respect of the following matters, like requiring the production and inspection of documents ; issuing summons for hearing to the designated officer and appellant and any other matter which may be prescribed.
The act clearly mentioned that if the designated officer does not comply with the orders or directions given to him, the person aggrieved may file an application before the second appellate authority and the second appellate authority shall direct the designated officer to show cause, within specified time, for not complying, with the aforementioned orders or directions.
After considering the cause, if any, shown by the designated officer and if no cause is shown within the time specified, the second appellate authority, may, if it is of the opinion that the designated officer has not complied with the orders or directions without reasonable cause, can impose a fine on such designated officer which shall not be less than Rupees 500 but may extend up to Rupees 5000.
Whereas second appellate authority if is of the opinion that the designated officer has failed to provide service to the eligible person or has caused delay in providing the service or has provided a service which is deficient in any manner, it may impose a fine on such designated officer@ Rs 250 for each day of such delay or Rupees 5000, whichever is less, in case of non-providing of service or delay in providing services and Rs 2000, in case of deficiency in service provided that before imposing such fine, the designated officer 'shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Similarly the second appellate authority if is of the opinion that the first appellate authority has failed to decide the appeal within the time, it may impose a fine on first appellate authority, which shall not be less than Rs 500 and not more than Rupees 5000 provided that before imposing such fine the first appellate authority shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
There is also provision of compensation in the act wherein the second appellate authority by order can direct that such portion of the fine imposed under the said section shall be awarded to the appellant, as compensation, as it may deem fit provided that the amount of such compensation awarded shall not exceed the amount of fine imposed under the said section.
In addition to imposition of fine, the second appellate authority, if it is satisfied that the designated officer or the first appellate authority, as the case may be, has failed to discharge the duties assigned to him under the Act without sufficient and reasonable cause, may recommend disciplinary action against him under the service rules applicable to him. Moreover if designated officer or first appellate authority is aggrieved by any order of second appellate authority in respect of imposition of fine under the Act, he or it may make an application for revision to the Special Tribunal within a period of 60 days from the date of passing of such order, which shall dispose of the application according to such procedure as may be prescribed.
The act as natter of protection to the designated officer gives him protection of action token in good faith, No suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall liable against any person for anything which is in good faith done or intended to be done under the Act or any rule made there under.
Keeping in view of above mentioned details about the PSGA 2011, the various government officers not prefer to give wide scale awareness about the act to the people who are continuously facing the problem at various government offices due to poor public delivery system and took months to the people to get water connections, electricity connections, income certificates, PRC's, caste certificates, RBA's, Nakal Girdawari, land documents and others. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
