Hi, Myself P.S. Sekhar,Tahsildar, Thamballapalle, Chittore Dist. A.P(A1) and my Revenue Inspector Venu gopal(A2) were trapped on 01/10/2015. My Retirement is on 31/12/2017. My crime number is 16/rct-tct/2015 in Tirupati ACB Range. Bribe amount of rupees 15000/-was recovered from the Revenue Inspector but not by me. The name of the A2 is not mentioned in FIR by ACB officials. The complainant(farmer) made a false complaint to ACB officals that A1 is demanding rupees 15000/- for mutating the names in the passbook in his favor from the existing passbook of his demised father. He made 2 applications for e-passbooks in meeseva for the lands already disposed by him and his father through registered sale documents. The time given by government for approving the passbook is 60 working days. It is even printed on the meeseva receipt. But the complainant made complaint with in 30 days from the date of application. The two applications were forwarded to the A2 by A1. The A2 is also forwarded these 2 applications to the concerned VRO. On the date of trap the 2 applications recovered from the concern VRO. Hence no official favor is pending before the A1,A2 on the date of trap. During enquiry the 2 applications rejected by the new in charge Tahsildar as the claimed lands are sold to others. We are sent to remand from 2/10/2015 to 17/10/2015. Now we are under suspension from 1/10/2015 to till date. It is ascertained that the directory general ACB Hyderabad has sent final report to the government recently. In the crime numer 1/rct-tct/2013 two Ayurveda govt. doctors(A1 & A2) were trapped by ACB who received bribe amount of rupees 7000/- from a govt. doctor. They were arrested and went on remand for 14 days. The names of two accused officers are entered in FIR. The two accused officers were managed to get departmental enquiry and escaped from prosecution. I have asked for the reports of the officers connected with the case i.e. Principal Secretary to Govt(Health), State vigilance Commissioner and Directory General ACB under RTI act but the officers rejected my RTI application under 8(1)(h) of RTI act. Hence I filed appeal before the central information commission and it is pending there. The 2 accused officers are now reinstated in to service and working as usual. One more point on this is the complainant is government servant. In my case the complainant is small farmer. If we observe both cases are similar in type. Is it possible to ask departmental enquiry in my case also. The present government issued nearly 35 orders for the departmental enquiry with accused officers from 2014-2016 but we are unable to know on what basis the government is giving orders. Most influential accused officers are getting departmental order and others are getting getting prosecution order. Government is not communicating any reasons for giving departmental/prosecution orders to the accused officers.Please let me know how to proceed, whom to contact, and other details for getting departmental enquiry.
in every trap proceeding a departmental enquire is required. both departmental and court case run simultaneously. however court takes cognizance and order for further investigation. and departmental enquire is required to take appropriate step like suspension or termination in respect of employee.
ACB report itself is not sufficient for departmental action. you should approach for initiation of departmental enquiry and challenge your suspension before the high court under a writ petition.
your suspension on the basis of acb trapping is illegal because all the officers of ACB are interested witness and complainant is also interested witness. any departmental action without giving opportunity to state the facts of the employee is illegal.
You should write to the government to order departmental inquiry in your case as well if it has been ordered in the case of other officers. If the govt turns down your request the decision can be challenged in the High Court through a writ petition.
Ordering departmental inquiry is purely governments description by following options available. Highly politician influence will be required for avoiding prosecution in ACB trap cases. Statement of the de-facto complainant under Cr.PC is crucial. Suppose the complainant disposes differently in his statement there are chances to get rid of severe consequences.
Departmental inquiry is different to that of the trapped case filed by the ACB.
You cannot compare another case of similar nature to your case.
Your department may not be of any help to you even if they agree to conduct the departmental inquiry, they cannot recommend the ACB police to withdraw the pending cases against you for the reason that this action was not prompted by the department whereas it was a direct case initiated by the ACB themselves.
Since you appear to have merits in yor side, why dont you challenge the case on merits and evidence in your support and get acquitted.
