Consumer Protection

December 24th is a landmark day in the history of consumer movement in India as on this day the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 came into existence. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was enacted by the Parliament to protect the interests of consumers against substandard products, increased prices through market manipulation, failed warranties, poor after sales service and unfair trade practices. It is a progressive and comprehensive piece of legislation covering all goods and services. Thus, 24th December is observed as National Consumer Day all over India. Consumer Protection Act (CPA) is considered as a benevolent social legislature for protecting consumers from the malpractices of the manufacturers. In order to meet the changing requirements of consumers in the emerging market environment the Act has been amended a number of times with the last amendment in 2002, providing more teeth to the laws and to cut down delays in disposal of cases by the Consumer Forums.
Markets can operate efficiently only when consumers are aware. Competitive markets require having information symmetry.  Consumers should be vigilant and well informed about the costs and benefits of each transaction they undertake in the market place enables greater efficiency of markets. Where the maximum consumers are aware and well informed, markets function more efficiently and competitive forces become sharp and have greater play thereby benefiting consumers. Errant members of the trade and industry are also warned that the law provides for legal action by aggrieved consumers and it may be more profitable to give consumers a fair deal than exploit them. In the present day, where every manufacturer is trying to maximise profits by resorting to aggressive and misleading advertisements and business practices involving use of unfair and restrictive trade there is an imperative need to build powerful, broad based consumer movement in the country. Once the level of awareness is raised and both rural and urban consumers become aware of their rights and responsibilities, pressure will automatically be brought on trade and industry and on the service providers to market quality goods and services at affordable prices. They will also then hesitate to indulge in unfair and restrictive trade practices.
Thus, the consumer or 'Grahak' in Hindi plays an important role in the economic system of a country. Without consumer demand, manufacturers would lack one of the key motivations to produce: and to sell to consumers. Many times consumers are equated to Gods in India. We come across statements written in many shops as "Consumer is King", "Consumer is Always right", "Grahak Devo Bhava".
Mahatama Gandhi also mentioned about the importance of consumers in market.
"A customer is the most important visitor on our premises. He is not dependent on us. We are dependent on him. He is not an interruption in our work - he is the purpose of it. We are not doing him a favour by serving him. He is doing us a favour by giving us the opportunity to serve him." Evolution of the Consumer Movement in IndiaIndia has an old history of consumer protection. Consumer protection was part of its ancient culture and formed the core of its political administration. Kautilya's 'Arthasasthra' was the basic law of ancient India and the same was strengthened with provisions to protect consumers. Sale of commodities was organized in such a way that general public was not put to any trouble. If high profits (for the ruler) put general public in trouble, then that trade activity was stopped immediately. For traders, profit limit was to be fixed. Even for services timely response was prescribed; e.g. for architects, carpenters, tailors, washer men, rules for the protection of consumer interest were given. Ancient literature also mentions that in India there were regulators who supervised weights and measures. For shortfall in weighing or measuring, sellers were fined heavily. Weights and measures used in trade were manufactured only by the official agency responsible for standardization and inspected every four months. Sellers passing off inferior products as superior were fined eight times the value of articles thus sold. For adulterated things, the seller was not only fined but also compelled to make good the loss.
After Independence from colonial rule in 1947 Indian economic policy was based on giving protection to domestic industries and not opening of domestic markets for foreign competition.  In India, the consumer movement as a 'social force' began with the necessity of protecting and promoting the interests of consumers against unfair trade practices which was very different from how the consumer movement started in Western countries. In western countries, consumer movement was the result of post - industrialization and affluence of goods and services.
The basic reasons for the birth of the consumer movement in India are:
a)Rampant food shortages, hoarding, black marketing, adulteration of food and edible oil gave birth to the consumer movement in an organised form, in the 1960s. The problem became particularly acute during the time of Indo-China war of 1962 and Indo-Pak war of 1965.
b)Further lack of product choices due to poor development in technology and growing inflation in 1970's which lead to consumer unrest. Till the 1970s, consumer organisations were largely engaged in writing articles and raising their voice against rising prices.
c)The consumer movement since then put pressure on business firms, as well as the government to correct business conduct that caused consumer detriment.
d)A major step taken in 1986 by the Indian government was the enactment of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.
Salient Features of the Consumer Protection ActOne of the most important milestones in the area of consumer movement in India has been the enactment of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The Act empowers the consumers to take action to seek redressal for their grievances. Unless a consumer is well aware of his/her rights s/he may not be in a position to enforce their rights. The law can only be as effective as the level of consumer awareness. The higher and widespread the level of consumer awareness, the more willing consumers will be to articulate their rights during their transactions with trade and industry. The greater the articulation of consumer concerns, the more the level of their exploitation in the market will tend to reduce. Trade and Industry will also become more conscious in formulating their trade practices for fear of retaliatory action by consumers. As the awareness among consumers rises, business managers will factor such awareness in their decision making and create mutually beneficial offers for products and services so that consumers are satisfied. Consumer satisfaction is a prerequisite for loyalty to brands and companies.
Under Section 6 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 the protection of the six rights of consumers are being ensured. They are right to safety, information, choice, representation, redressal and consumer education, and provides for a simple, speedy and inexpensive redressal to the consumers' in the nature of a specific nature and also awards compensation, wherever appropriate, to the consumer. An exclusive three tier redressal machinery as an alternative to the civil court and other legal remedies available in the country has been established under the Consumer Protection Act. where an aggrieved consumer can seek redressal against any defective goods purchased or deficiencies in services availed, including restrictive/unfair trade practices adopted by such manufacturer and trader of goods/service provider. In the past thirty years more than 4.3 million consumer cases were adjudicated and decided by the consumer fora.
The Consumer Protection Act 1986 has defined the term consumer through 'goods' and 'services'. According to Section 2 (1)(d) of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 'Consumer' means any person who :
1.Buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such use is made with the approval of such person, but does not include a person who obtains such goods for resale or for any commercial purpose; or
2.hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who [hires or avails of] the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person [but does not include a person who avails of such services for commercial purpose]. 
United Nations Guidelines on Consumer Protection (UNGCP)UNGCP launched in 1985 was revised, after due deliberations by all stakeholders, in December 2015. The UN General Assembly on 22nd December 2015 approved the revised UNGCP 2015. India had actively participated in the process of revision of the UNGCP in 2015 and emphasized for having an oversight mechanism, which has been set up in the form of the Intergovernmental Group of Experts (IGE) under Guideline 95 of the revised UNGCP 2015. All the member states are de-facto members of the IGE. The first session of the Intergovernmental Group of Experts on Consumer Protection Law and Policy was held at the Palais des Nations in Geneva, on 17 and 18 October 2016 under the aegis of UNCTAD. Representatives from 66 countries and 5 intergovernmental organizations, including the heads of competition and consumer protection authorities, attended the high-level discussions. In the meeting, the Minister of State for Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, India, stated that the Intergovernmental Group of Experts provided a forum that facilitated engagement and mutual understanding, as well as the development of appropriate strategies to improve consumer protection. The Second IGE meeting held in July 2017, recognised the important role of relevant stakeholders, particularly with regard to the inclusive consumer protection policies to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals; It underlined the importance of designing and implementing specific measures aimed at the protection of vulnerable and disadvantaged consumers, recognizing that member States may adopt differing definitions to address specific domestic needs, and suggested further research in particular for this category of consumers in developing countries; It emphasized the importance of harnessing e-commerce to increase the welfare of consumers worldwide while limiting its potential risks and stressed the need to strengthen international cooperation, including informal collaboration, among agencies, to enhance consumer trust in e-commerce, and the initiatives taken to build trust in the digital economy.
Aimed at promoting the international cooperation in the field of Consumer Protection among the Asian countries, for mutual sharing of best practices, India in partnership with UNCTAD hosted an International conference on Consumer Protection on 26th and 27th October, 2017. Honourable Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the conference and mentioned that the "Protection of consumer interests is a priority of the government. This is also reflected in our resolution of the New India. Moving beyond Consumer Protection, New India will have Best Consumer Practices and Consumer Prosperity."
Way ForwardWith the Indian economy and Indian industry growing leaps and bounds and with the changing market environment the Bureau of Indian Standards BIS Act, 2016 has been promulgated. BIS has also developed a consumer-friendly App called CARE, which can be used to access the information and lodge a complaint against an ISI marked product/ Hallmarked item. In order to protect the rights and interests of the consumers and promotion of uniformity and standardization of business practices and transactions in the real estate sector the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 has been passed.  Further the government has launched INGRAM -Integrated Grievance Redressal Mechanism portal for bringing all stakeholders under a single platform. On one hand the National Consumer Helpline with its toll free number 1800-11-4000 or 14404 provides advice and guidance and empowers consumers. A smart consumer application has been launched to enable the consumer to scan bar codes and get all the details about the product.  Keeping into account the growing digital market in India and the asymmetry of knowledge amongst the various customer segments in India a New Consumer Protection Act, 2016 is likely to be passed by the Parliament soon. It is hoped that the new Consumer Protection Act would overcome the shortcomings of the existing law and it would give a big boost to the consumer movement.

Ethics - Whether a Governent Servant can open a company ?

A company floated by Union Minister Nitin Gadkari’s private secretary has been raising funds and organising events with support from the government, raising questions about a possible violation of rules governing the conduct of civil servants.

Vaibhav Dange was appointed private secretary to the Minister for Road Transport, Highways and Shipping for five years on a contract basis. His appointment was notified on August 8, 2014, with the approval of the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet.

Mr. Dange, an old loyalist of Mr. Gadkari, floated the ‘Indian Federation of Green Energy’ (IFGE) on October 9, 2014, along with Motiram Kisanrao Patil, a resident of Chalisgaon, Maharashtra. Both held 50% shares each. The entity is a Section 8 company, which is meant to operate not for profit.

Mr. Dange was asked whether he may have violated Rule 12 of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, which says: “No Government servant shall, except with the previous sanction of the Government or of the prescribed authority, ask for or accept contributions to, or otherwise associate himself with the raising of, any funds or other collections in cash or in kind in pursuance of any object whatsoever.”

Charges denied

But he denied the charge. “I categorically and emphatically state that I have not violated any central civil services (conduct) rules or any other service rules in any manner whatsoever ever since I have joined the government service,” he told The Hindu in a written statement.

According to documents from the Registrar of Companies (RoC) database, IFGE has either raised or invited funds, including from government departments and state-owned entities. Its balance sheet shows ₹74 lakh as cash in hand at the end of the financial year 2015. In one of the filings, it declared ₹73 lakh as ‘corpus grant in trust’.

In 2015-16, the balance sheet showed a ‘corpus grant’ of ₹1.33 crore. In the balance sheet for the same year, the company said: “Treatment of Grant in Aid has been made in the accounts as per AS-12 Accounting for Government Grants.” That its filing is declared to be in conformity with the accounting standard required for government grants suggests that the government has extended a grant-in-aid to IFGE.

Mr. Dange told The Hindu that Mr. Gadkari’s Ministry had not allotted any money to IFGE.

However, according to the company’s website, IFGE has been involved in organising conferences and seminars on various topics in partnership with departments and PSUs under Mr. Gadkari. These included: the ‘Global Bamboo Summit’ in April 2016 in Indore, which was supported by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.

In May 2017, IFGE was involved in organising a ‘Conclave on Green Ports & Oil Spill Management’ in the Shipping Corporation of India auditorium in Mumbai. It was supported by the Ministry of Shipping, as well as other organisations associated with the Ministry, such as the Sagarmala project. “Ministry of Shipping is supporting this event. Indian Ports Association is the key partner,” the event’s brochure said. The brochure also said a port could become a sponsor of the event by contributing between ₹3 lakh and ₹15 lakh.

Resignation

The Hindu sent a questionnaire to Mr. Dange on November 7. Nine days later, on November 16, IFGE filed documents showing his resignation as its director. The resignation letter filed with the Registrar of Companies states that he resigned on September 13, 2017.

Mr. Dange said that after he joined the government “I resigned from IFGE and accordingly intimated the competent authority. I do not hold any position whatsoever in the IFGE.”

To a set of questions that The Hindu sent regarding subsequent developments such as his resignation from IFGE, Mr. Dange sent a detailed response. He said, “It may be noted that I was involved in setting up IFGE when I was not part of the Government and after joining the Government I took steps to resign from IFGE even though it is open even for full-time, career government officials to undertake any work of literary, scientific or charitable nature.”

“The IFGE, an independent organisation, was started on 30th November 2013 (application to RoC) when I was a private individual and not part of the Government,” he said. However, RoC documents say the company was incorporated only on October 9, 2014, two months after Mr. Dange was appointed Mr. Gadkari’s PS.

“The IFGE has been incorporated as “not for profit” organisation (sec 25/ new sec 8) with no rights or benefits like remuneration, dividend to members. The license under sec 25 was issued by GOI on 24th March 2014 when the UPA was in power at the centre,” he claimed.

50% shareholder

At the time of going to press, RoC documents show that Mr. Dange continues to hold 50% of the shares in the company.

Despite repeated attempts, Ministers Nitin Gadkari and Suresh Prabhu, who are among a galaxy of high profile patrons listed by IFGE, were unavailable for comment. Their offices confirmed receiving the queries sent on November 7. Mr. Gadkari’s office said they were awaiting further instructions from the Minister, while Mr. Prabhu’s office said the questionnaire would be forwarded to officials concerned.

Computer Forensics

COMPUTER FORENSICS (1) Computer forensics deals with identification, documentation, extraction and preservation of computer evidence. Typically, computer forensic tools exist in form of computer software and hardware, procedures and communication protocols. To ensure accuracy and reliability of computer evidence, it is imperative to go for cross validation of the results through use of multiple tools and techniques and standard procedures. Vigilance Manual 2017 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues 308 In terms of Section 2 (1) (h) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, a computer is any electronic, magnetic, optical or other high-speed data processing device or system which performs logical, arithmetic and memory functions by manipulation of electronic, magnetic or optical impulses, and includes all inputs, outputs, processing, storage, computer software or communication facilities which are related or connected to the computer in a computer system or computer network. A computer system is a device or collection of devices, having interface with input and output support device, which are programmable; and can be used for performing logic, arithmetic, data storage and retrieval, communication control and other functions making use of computer programmes, electronic instructions and input / output data. Computer network refers to interconnection of one or more computers through communications media. (2) With growing and widespread use of computer technology, a computing machine / computer system / communication network can be used for committing irregularities / crimes; at the same time, these objects can also be victims of nefarious activities. The first step in the direction of committing such activities is to have access to a computer / computer system / computer network; the access may be physical or from a remote location through a communication network. Though unauthorised and remote access to a computer / computer system makes investigation in to an act of omission or Commission difficult, we need to realise that such acts, like any other conventional irregularity / crime, leave behind evidence at the scene of crime. Electronic evidence normally consists of an electronic record which, in turn, may be in form of data, image or sound stored, received or sent in an electronic form or micro film or computer generated micro fiche. Computer data means a representation of information, knowledge, facts, concepts or instructions, prepared in a formalized manner and intended to be processed in a computer system or computer network. Significant digital sources of evidence include computers, mobile devices, removable media and external data storage devices, online banking software, e-mail/ Vigilance Manual 2017 309 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues notes / letters, telephone records, financial or asset records, electronic money transfers, accounting or record keeping software, etc. (3) A computer forensic examination may reveal when a document first appeared on a computer, when it was last edited, when it was last saved or printed, and which user carried out these actions. It can detect sophisticated money trails / movement of proceeds of corruption. As much of the day-to-day communication and financial transactions are conducted over the Internet, real time monitoring of bank accounts, e-mail traffic and the interception and processing of other forms of on-line data become important for conducting a proper investigation, complementing traditional investigative and surveillance techniques. However, all these activities require the assistance of a digital forensic expert. The Cyber Forensic Laboratory and Digital Imaging Centre, functioning under CFSL / CBI, assist investigating / enforcement agencies in the collection and forensic analysis of electronic evidence. Services of other such forensic laboratories of Central / State Government or NABL accredited laboratories may also be used for this purpose. 11.6.2 TRAINING IN FORENSIC SCIENCE Commission expects that Departments / Organisations should take steps to build capacity of their personnel, engaged in vigilance inquiries & investigations and disciplinary matters, etc., in Forensic Sciences. Commission has organised several training courses for CVOs and vigilance functionariesin several premier institutes. Some of the organisations have also got tailor-made courses organised. 

Fundamental Duties

Fundamental Duties: Article 51A of Indian Constitution casts certain duties on every citizen including cherishing and following noble ideals. It shall be the duty of every citizen of India, — (a) to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the national Flag and the National Anthem; (b) to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom; (c) to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India; (d) to defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so; (e) to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women; (f) to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture; (g) to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures; (h) to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform; (i) to safeguard public property and to abjure violence; (j) to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement; (k) who is a parent or guardian to provide opportunities for education to his child or, as the case may be, ward between the age of six and fourteen years. It can be said that a natural corollary of these duties explicitly mandated, is a duty to be honest and to oppose corruption.

integrity pledge

Integrity Pledge: To foster probity and integrity in public life, the Commission has launched an 'Integrity Pledge' which can be taken electronically by the citizen as well as by organisations. It can be accessed on the Commission's website at www.pledge.cvc.in. By taking the Integrity pledge, citizens commit to uphold highest standards of honesty & integrity by following probity and rule of law in all walks of life, to neither take nor offer bribe, to perform all tasks with honesty and transparency, act in public interest and report any incident of corruption to appropriate authority. Similarly, by taking the integrity pledge, organisation viz., corporate/ entities / firms, etc., would affirm their commitment to eradicate corruption and to uphold highest standards of integrity & good governance by promoting a culture of honesty and integrity in the conduct of their activities. Organisations would pledge to neither offer nor accept bribe, commit to good corporate governance based on transparency, accountability and fairness, adhere to relevant laws, rules and compliance mechanisms in the conduct of business, adopt a code of ethics for all its employees, sensitise their employees of laws, regulations, etc., relevant to their work for honest discharge of their duties, provide grievance redressal and Whistle Blower mechanisms for reporting grievances and fraudulent activities and protect the rights and interests of stakeholders and the society at large.

ETHICAL CONDUCT

Encouraging ethical conduct: Corruption mainly includes abuse of authority and selfish exercise of power by those who hold special position in public life. Hence, corruption can be linked to lack of ethical values. Combating corruption is, therefore, not just a matter of making laws and creating institutions, but is deeply rooted in human values, ethics and morality of the individuals, organisations and the society at large. Inculcating ethical and moral values in the citizen -. Truthfulness, Honesty, Integrity, Probity, Courage, Uprightness, Respect for and obedience to law, etc. - is the foundation stone of any society’s fight against corruption. Stigmatising the culture of Corruption, favouritism, nepotism and promoting meritocracy create a conducive social climate. Similarly, the spirit of ‘consumerism’ leads to avarice and craving for easy money. If the Citizen is taught to say ‘No Vigilance Manual 2017 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues 302 to Bribe’, the ‘Supply side of Corruption’ automatically gets stifled. Parents, family, peer group, teachers, educational institutions, social intellectual and spiritual leaders, civil society, press, mass media including social media, Governmental and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), etc. have a major role to play in the inculcation and dissemination of high ethical and moral values in individuals, organisations and the society at large

Right to Information Act , 2005

11.3 RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 (1) The Right to Information Act, 2005 was enacted by the Government for providing right to every citizen to secure access to information under the control of the Public Authority concerned. Every Public Authority covered under the RTI Act, 2005 receives a large number of applications from the public, seeking information on various issues and the requested information is to be given by the Central Public Information Officers (CPIOs) / Public Information Officers (PIOs) concerned of the Public Authorities. Under the provisions of RTI Act, 2005, an Applicant has the right to make an Appeal to the first Appellate Authority of the Public Authority concerned, in case, he is not satisfied with the reply / information provided to him by the CPIO / PIO concerned. (2) The necessity for First Appeal arises due to the fact that there are shortcomings / ambiguities in the reply / information provided by the CPIO / PIO of the Public Authority concerned. However, it has been observed that sometimes the First Appeal is made by the Appellant out of ignorance of the provisions of RTI Act, 2005 or his / her lack of clarity about the scope and limitation of the provisions of RTI Act, 2005. (3) Central Information Commission (CIC) is authorised under the RTI Act, 2005 to receive and enquire into a complaint and / or decide on Second Appeal relating to deficiencies in supply of information to the RTI Applicants by the Public Authority concerned. If the points mentioned in para 11.3.4 below are kept in view by the various Public Authorities, while replying to RTI Applicants, it may be useful in increasing the level of satisfaction among the RTI Applicants and increased awareness among the Applicants about the provisions, scope and limitations of RTI Act, 2005. With the increased knowledge about the provisions of RTI Act, 2005, Vigilance Manual 2017 293 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues the Applicants would be in a better position to make RTI Applications in an unambiguous manner, thus making it easier for the Public Authorities also to provide an appropriate, clear and specific reply to the Applicants, in letter and spirit of the provisions of RTI Act, 2005. (4) Common shortcomings noticed in the replies given by the CPIOs / PIOs to the RTI Applicants and corrective measures thereon to be taken by the authorities concerned are as under: - (i) Many a time, while rejecting the Applicant’s request for information sought by him, the reasons for such rejection / denial of the information are not given by the CPIOs / PIOs concerned, which is a violation of Section 7(8)(i) of the RTI Act, 2005. The CPIOs simply quote the Section of the RTI Act, 2005, under which the information is being denied or they state that the issue raised by the Applicant does not constitute ‘information’ as defined under Section 2(f) and 2(i) of the RTI Act, 2005, which is not sufficient. The ‘reasons’, why exemption is being claimed from disclosure and / or why the issue raised does not constitute ‘information’ and the relevant rulings of the CIC and / or constitutional courts, etc., must be explained to the Applicants. (ii) In cases where the information is denied and the Applicant’s request is being rejected, the period during which an Appeal may be preferred and the particulars of the Appellate Authority are not mentioned in the reply to the Applicant, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 7(8)(ii) and 7(8)(iii) of the RTI Act, 2005, in such cases. The CPIOs / PIOs should provide these details to the Applicants, in case, information / a part thereof is being denied to the Applicants. (iii) Sometimes the reply to the Applicants is given in perfunctory manner, without verifying the records of the organisation concerned. The information as sought by the Applicants, should be given to them after checking the records thoroughly. (iv) Adherence to the time limit is essential in handling Applications received under RTI Act, 2005. RTI Act, 2005 has specified time limits for different stages and actions to be taken on Applications received by the Public Authority concerned. Any applications / part(s) thereof, which are Vigilance Manual 2017 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues 294 required to be forwarded to other Public Authorities, should normally be forwarded within 5 days of the receipt of the Application, in accordance with Section 6(3) of the RTI Act, 2005. (v) Under Section 11 of the RTI Act, 2005, notice to the third party is to be given only for that information pertaining to third party, which has been treated as confidential by it. Such notice is to be given within 5 days of the receipt of the request and a final decision regarding providing the information is to be taken by the CPIO concerned, within 40 days of the receipt of the request. (vi) In many cases the CPIOs / PIOs delay the reply to the Applicants beyond 30 days’ time limit prescribed under Section 7(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, without assigning any reason either on file and / or without informing the Applicant. In case, it is not possible to give the information to the Applicant within 30 days, the CPIOs / PIOs should send an interim reply within 30 days’, informing the Applicants about the delay. (vii) Sometimes there is delay in providing information to the Applicants on the ground that the relevant files are under submission with the higher authorities. In such cases, the CPIOs / PIOs should withdraw the files ‘temporarily’ for providing information to the RTI Applicants. (viii) The CPIOs / PIOs while denying the information to the Applicants must records the reasons in the file also to justify the denial / rejection of the request of the Applicant. (5) Many times, a question arises regarding disclosure of information pertaining to disciplinary action / proceedings / show-cause notices / punishments awarded to a public servant and financial details of a public servant. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 27734 of 2012 in the case of Girish Ramchandra Deshpande Vs. Central Information Commission and Ors. has ordered that— "The petitioner herein sought for copies of all memos, show cause notices and censure / punishment awarded to the third respondent from his employer and also details viz. movable and immovable properties and also the details of his investments, lending and borrowing from Banks and other Vigilance Manual 2017 295 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues financial institutions. Further, he has also sought for the details of gifts stated to have accepted by the third respondent, his family members and friends and relatives at the marriage of his son. The information mostly sought for finds a place in the income tax returns of the third respondent. The question that has come up for consideration is whether the abovementioned information sought for qualifies to be "personal information" as defined in clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, 2005. We are in agreement with the CIC and the courts below that the details called for by the petitioner i.e. copies of all memos issued to the third respondent, show cause notices and orders of censure / punishment, etc. are qualified to be personal information as defined in clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, 2005. The performance of an employee / officer in an organisation is primarily a matter between the employee and the employer and normally those aspects are governed by the service rules which fall under the expression "personal information", the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or public interest. On the other hand, the disclosure of which would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of that individual. Of course, in a given case, if the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer of the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information, appropriate orders could be passed but the petitioner cannot claim those details as a matter of right. The details disclosed by a person in his income tax returns are "personal information" which stand exempted from disclosure under clause (j) of Section 8(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, unless involves a larger public interest and the Central Public Information Officer or the State Public Information Officer or the Appellate Authority is satisfied that the larger public interest justifies the disclosure of such information. The petitioner in the instant case has not made a bona fide public interest in seeking information, the disclosure of such information would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy of the individual under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005. We are, therefore, of the view that the petitioner has not succeeded in establishing that the information sought for is for the larger public interest. Vigilance Manual 2017 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues 296 That being the fact, we are not inclined to entertain this special leave petition. Hence, the same is dismissed". (6) The above decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India may be kept in view while deciding about disclosure of information relating to disciplinary action / proceedings / show cause notices / punishments awarded to a public servant and financial details of a public servant. 11.4 INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION AGAINST CORRUPTION Globalisation and rapid strides in technology have made territorial boundaries irrelevant. Corruption has increasingly assumed transnational ramifications afflicting nations all across. Hence, corruption can be tackled at global level only with international cooperation. Countries have to assist each other in investigations, prosecutions, judicial proceedings and in recovery of proceeds of crime, etc. Mutual legal assistance may be afforded by countries to the fullest extent possible through relevant laws, treaties, agreements and arrangements. International cooperation may be afforded in the area of law enforcement, joint investigation, extradition of accused, transfer of proceedings, sharing of information, recovery and repatriation of proceeds of crime, etc. The UN Convention Against Corruption lays great emphasis on international cooperation in the fight against corruption. 11.4.1 United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC): (a) United Nations Convention Against Corruption is a multilateral convention, which has been negotiated by members of United Nations. It is the first global, legally binding international anti-corruption instrument, which was initially adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 31st October, 2003. It has since been ratified by a total of 178 parties upto 31st December, 2015, which includes 175 United Nations Member States, apart from the Cook Islands, the State of Palestine and the European Union. India has ratified the United Nations Convention Against Corruption in May, 2011. (b) United Nations Convention Against Corruption requires the State Parties to implement several anti-corruption measures including Whistle Blowing mechanism which may affect their laws, institutions and practices. These Vigilance Manual 2017 297 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues measures aim at preventing corruption, including domestic and foreign bribery, embezzlement, trading in influence and money laundering. UNCAC is intended to strengthen international law enforcement and judicial cooperation, providing effective legal mechanisms for asset recovery, technical assistance and information exchange, and mechanisms for implementation of the convention, including the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption. (c) Chapter IV of United Nations Convention Against Corruption deals with International Cooperation against Corruption. Article 46 provides for Mutual Legal Assistance which are: - (i) State Parties shall afford one another the widest measure of mutual legal assistance in investigations, prosecutions and judicial proceedings in relation to the offences covered by this Convention. (ii) Mutual legal assistance shall be afforded to the fullest extent possible under relevant laws, treaties, agreements and arrangements of the requested State Party with respect to investigations, prosecutions and judicial proceedings in relation to the offences for which a legal person may be held liable in accordance with Article 26 of this Convention in the requesting State Party. (iii) Mutual legal assistance to be afforded in accordance with this article may be requested for any of the following purposes: (a) Taking evidence or statements from persons; (b) Effecting service of judicial documents; (c) Executing searches and seizures, and freezing; (d) Examining objects and sites; (e) Providing information, evidentiary items and expert evaluations; (f) Providing originals or certified copies of relevant documents and records, including Government, bank, financial, corporate or business records; (g) Identifying or tracing proceeds of crime, property, instrumentalities or other things for evidentiary purposes; (h) Facilitating the voluntary appearance of persons in the requesting State Party; (i) Any other type of assistance that is not contrary to the domestic law of the requested State Party; (j) Identifying, freezing and tracing proceeds of crime in accordance with the provisions of chapter V of this Convention; (k) The recovery of assets, in accordance with the provisions of chapter V of this Convention. Vigilance Manual 2017 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues 298 (d) India is a member of Interpol and the NCB-Delhi which is the Interpol wing in India, functions as a branch of CBI. NCB-Delhi is the sole authorised agency in India for contacts with the Police agencies of other countries. Besides, India also has Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) with 39 countries, Extradition Treaty with 37 countries and Extradition arrangement with 7 countries which facilitate International Cooperation for the purpose of compliance with Article 46 of UNCAC. For more detail, Chapter 25 of Crime Manual of CBI may be referred. How to provide / seek assistance of Interpol is provided at the CBI web-link on Interpol / MLAT. (e) As per Government of India(Allocation of Business) Rules, 1961, the Ministry of Home Affairs is the nodal Ministry and the Central authority for seeking and providing Mutual Legal Assistance in criminal law matters. The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) receives all such requests, examines them and takes appropriate action. Cases pertaining to civil and commercial matters are required to be taken up with the Ministry of Law & Justice, which finalises and notifies treaties and arrangements with other countries as per the relevant statutory provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Therefore, all requests for seeking assistance from a foreign country including the service of all kinds of judicial processes or other documents are directly submitted to the Ministry of Home Affairs in criminal law matters and to the Ministry of Law & Justice in civil and commercial matters. (f) Article 33 of United Nations Convention Against Corruption provides for protection of Whistle Blower which says that "each State Party shall consider incorporating into its domestic legal system appropriate measures to provide protection against any unjustified treatment for any person who reports in good faith and on reasonable grounds to the competent authorities any facts concerning offences established in accordance with this Convention". (g) The ratification of United Nations Convention Against Corruption by India necessitated creation of an appropriate whistle blowing mechanism and review of the existing Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Accordingly, the Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2011 was enacted in May, 2014. The Vigilance Manual 2017 299 Chapter - XI Some Relevant Issues same however, is not in force as the Govt. of India aims to modify certain provisions of Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2011. A Bill to this effect has been introduced in the Parliament to carry out the amendments. The PIDPI Resolution 2004 contains provisions regarding protection to whistle blowers. It is described in detail in Chapter IV of the Manual. (h) The Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2011 is an Act "to establish a mechanism to receive complaints relating to disclosure on any allegation of corruption or wilful misuse of power or wilful misuse of discretion against any public servant and to inquire or cause an inquiry into such disclosure and to provide adequate safeguards against victimization of the person making such complaint and for matters connected therewith and incidental thereto". (i) India being one of the signatories to the United Nations Convention Against Corruption has displayed its commitment to implement the provisions of the same, in order to fight corruption and prevent inappropriate activities in public life. A step in this direction was to amend some of the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by bringing out the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill, 2013.

Preventive Vigilance Santhanam Committee recommendations Material for Ethics Paper Civils exam Mains

RECOMMENDATIONS OF SANTHANAM COMMITTEE (a) “Corruption cannot be eliminated or even significantly reduced unless preventive measures are planned and implemented in a sustained and effective manner. Preventive action must include administrative, legal, social, economic and educative measures” (Santhanam Committee Report, 1964). (b) During a debate in Parliament in June, 1962 Members of Parliament expressed concern over corruption in public administration and sought remedial measures. In response, a Committee was set up under Shri K. Santhanam, Member of Parliament which identified four major causes of corruption, namely: (i) administrative delays, (ii) Government taking upon itself more than what it could manage by way of regulatory functions, (iii) scope for personal discretion in the exercise of powers vested in different categories of Govt. servants and (iv) Cumbersome procedures in dealing with various matters which were of importance to citizens in their day to day affairs. (c) The Santhanam Committee in its Report observed that the main effort for checking corruption must come from within the Ministry / Department and that it is important to be continuously on the watch for sensitive spots rather than merely taking action when some case comes to notice.



It was suggested that Ministries undertake a systematic and thorough review of the laws, rules, procedures and practices for the purpose of listing discretionary powers, levels at which these are exercised, manner in which they are exercised, control over the exercise of such powers and the points at which citizens come into contact with the Departments and why. It was also recommended that a study should be made by Ministries of the extent, possible scope and modes of corruption, remedial measures prescribed and their effectiveness. (d) The Report deals in detail with the major causes of corruption and steps to deal with each. The Committee observed that: (i) Administrative delays must be reduced to the extent possible and firm action should be taken to eliminate causes of delay. (ii) Each Ministry should undertake a review of existing procedures and practices to find out causes of delay, points at which delay occurs and devise steps to minimize the same. (iii) Time limits should be prescribed and these should be strictly adhered to; those responsible for delays should be called to account. (iv) Levels at which files are to be processed and manner of decision making have also been prescribed. The Committee recommended that: (i) Ministries review their regulatory functions and whether the manner of discharge of those functions can be improved. (ii) while recognising that it may not be possible to completely eliminate discretion, it should be possible to devise a system of administration which would reduce the need for personal discretion, to a minimum. (iii) that a serious attempt be made to educate citizens about their rights and responsibilities and make arrangements to enable citizens’ access to the administration without having to go through intermediaries. Other preventive measures listed in the Report include: - (i) recruitment of officers / officials with high integrity, (ii) informal codes of conduct for different categories of Government servants


having agencies where a genuine complainant can seek redressal and protection from harassment, (iv) easy availability of forms required by the public for obtaining licenses, etc., (v) ban on Government servants accepting private employment after retirement among others. (e) Significant developments have taken place since the recommendations of the Santhanam Committee were made. In 2003, statutory status was conferred upon the Central Vigilance Commission and it also became a multi-member body. In 2004, it was made the designated authority to receive whistle blower complaints and to protect the whistle blowers. The institutional framework for addressing corruption has been progressively strengthened with the establishment of the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Directorate of Enforcement, the Directorate General of Income Tax Investigation, State Anti-Corruption agencies and Lokayuktas and the legal framework has also expanded. There are also elaborate conduct rules which aim to promote integrity in public services and other policies and guidelines for transparency in recruitments and promotions.


10.2 THE CONCEPT OF PREVENTIVE VIGILANCE (i) Concept: It is adoption of a package of measures to improve systems and procedures to eliminate / reduce corruption, promote transparency and ease of doing business. (ii) Who is required to implement preventive vigilance measures? Preventive vigilance involves systemic improvements which besides reducing corruption also lead to better operational results. It is a tool of management and good governance and therefore, it is the duty of the management as a whole, and not of the CVO alone. Indeed, it can be said that it is the duty of every employee. 10.2.1 Causes of corruption: Preventive vigilance is aimed at identifying, tackling / addressing the root cause of corruption within the organisation. The common causes of corruption, inter alia, could be:


(a) Excessive regulation & licensing. (b) Complicated rules and regulations. (c) Monopoly over delivery of goods / services. (d) Lack of transparency. (e) Lack of accountability. (f) Too much discretionary power. (g) Poor regulatory framework. (h) Poor grievance redressal mechanism. (i) Very low rate of detection of corruption. (j) Lack of condemnation of corrupt practices by the public. (k) Absence of a formal system of inculcating values, ethics & integrity. (l) Inadequacy of regular / periodic / surprise checks. (m) Rigid bureaucratic framework / processes. (n) Lack of awareness about rights, duties, procedure to complain, rules, laws, etc. 10.3 POTENTIAL AREAS OF CORRUPTION Preventive vigilance is aimed at tackling the areas vulnerable to corruption within the organisation. Although potential areas of corruption are specific to organisations / sectors, there are some broad areas common to all organisations, which need special attention while putting in place a system of preventive vigilance. These relate to: - (a) Procurement: Procurement is a vast area ranging from procurement of store materials & services to execution of infrastructure projects. It is one of the major corruption prone areas in all organisations. (b) Sale of goods and services: The disposal of goods (the reverse of procurement) and services is also a major area of corruption in some organisations. Similarly, allocation of scarce and / or precious natural resources is an area of corruption. (c) Human resource management: Human resource management is common to all organisations and the processes relating to recruitment, promotion, transfer and posting are prone to manipulation and corruption.
Delivery of services to public: Although not common to all Public Sector Organisations, major Government Departments are involved in delivery of services which are a potential area of corruption. (e) Enforcement: The enforcement of Acts, Rules and Regulations is also an area vulnerable to corruption mainly due to lack of awareness among citizens and ineffective grievance redressal mechanism. 10.4 PREVENTIVE VIGILANCE MEASURES Preventive vigilance measures can broadly be categorized as: - (a) Simplification and standardisation of rules: Simplification and standardisation of rules and procedures results in elimination of discretion and arbitrariness, which in turn reduces corruption. Identifying areas involving exercise of discretion which are not governed by guidelines together with a complete review of existing rules and regulations needs to be undertaken to introduce clarity and accountability. Similarly, simplification and standardisation of forms / application also reduces scope for corruption. (b) Leveraging technology: Technology as an enabler for fighting corruption has been effectively demonstrated. E-procurements, E-payments, use of websites for dissemination of information and creating awareness, use of CCTV in places of public dealing, use of GPS enabled devices / RFIDs, use of appropriate analytical tools, computer assisted audit techniques for detecting frauds are examples of how technology strengthens the system of preventive vigilance. (c) Automation: Using IT as an enabler for reducing corruption along with business process re-engineering is recognized as an effective tool of preventive vigilance. Automation reduces interface / interaction between public officials and common public. It also removes monopoly in delivery of services and personal discretion, reducing the opportunities for discretion thus leading to reduction in corruption. Therefore, the organisations should strive to reduce interface of officials with common public / customers by way of automation / online services. However, IT systems are not an end in themselves; they are the means to an end. It



follows therefore that there is a need to develop a system of alerts as also a response mechanism. (d) Business Process Re-engineering (BPR): BPR is very important as it helps the organisations rethink how they do their work and in the process, encourages a full-scale re-creation of processes in order to meet the objectives of the organisation. Existing processes may be re-engineered to even prevent leakage of revenue. (e) Transparency: Transparency removes the information gap between the public and public officials which in turn reduces corruption. The website of the Department / Organisation should contain rules & regulations, contact details of officials and all other information useful for common public / customers. (f) Accountability: There is no fear of punitive action due to lack of accountability. A system with clear accountability and assigned responsibility at each level is necessary not only for smooth functioning but increased transparency, efficiency and for ensuring effective punitive action in case of misconduct. (g) Control & Supervision: Regular and routine inspections, surprise inspections, audit and reviews keep a check on aberrant and corrupt behaviour. A list of points and areas prone to corruption will facilitate the purpose of organising checks and streamlining procedures. A structured interaction between vigilance and internal audit will enable better monitoring and also help identify potential problem areas. (h) Early detection of misconducts: Early detection of misconducts apart from bringing to light the damages to the system, will enable recouping the loss wherever possible and facilitate control of further damage. (i) Time-bound and effective punitive action: Punitive (disciplinary or criminal) action within short period of occurrence of misconduct and finalisation of such cases in a time-bound manner resulting in award of exemplary and adequate (commensurate with gravity of misconduct) punishment deters others from committing such misconduct. Delays and inefficiencies in such proceedings encourages and emboldens others to



take risk of committing misconduct under the belief that nothing would happen to them. (j) Providing necessary infrastructural facilities: Non-provision of adequate infrastructural facilities such as accommodation, conveyance, utilities, etc. also induce corruption. (k) Training & Awareness: Capacity building and sensitization at all levels and across all functional areas is important. Public officials should be made aware of their duties and responsibilities, code of conduct, rules and regulations through regular training and awareness programmes. A list of Dos & Don’ts for employees / officials is a simple yet effective tool. Likewise, familiarization with Standard Operating Procedures relating to different spheres of activity will enhance awareness and reduce procedural violations / inadvertent errors arising out of a lack of awareness. Knowledge sharing initiatives such as publishing / circulating information relating to areas where fraud / misconduct has been detected and sharing information on best practices are other effective awareness generation methods for more effective preventive vigilance. There should also be an effort to create awareness among all stakeholders. (l) Conducive work environment: Conducive work environment for preventive vigilance may include drawing up a list of sensitive posts, rotation policy for sensitive posts, identification of persons of doubtful integrity and keeping them away from sensitive posts / public dealing. It would be necessary also to create an environment that promotes ethical behaviour. Protection to Whistle Blowers must be ensured in order to bring to light cases of corruption. (m) Awareness among public: If public is made aware of their rights, and also of the rules and regulations, then they are able to resist unfair treatment and arbitrary behaviour by public officials. Public should be encouraged to demand the services due to them and to raise their voice when their rights are denied or powers are misused by public officers. Organisations should prominently display information relevant / useful to the common public on their office notice board / website.


Inculcating Moral Values: Inculcating ethical behaviour among public, particularly the younger generation is an important tool of preventive vigilance. Vigilance Awareness Week (VAW), celebrated every year during the last week of October is aimed at creating such awareness. This opportunity should be utilized by all CVOs / Organisations to create awareness among public as well as among its own officials regarding need for imbibing right values. 10.5 INTEGRITY PACT 10.5.1 Integrity Pact (IP) is an important tool of preventive vigilance which is aimed at preventing corruption and ensuring integrity in public procurement. The Central Vigilance Commission is the nodal authority for the implementation of Integrity Pact in India. It addresses not only bribery, but also other corrupt practices such as collusion and bid rigging. IP is a written agreement between the Government / Government Department / Government Company, etc. and all the bidders agreeing to refrain themselves from bribery, collusion, etc. If the written agreement is violated, the pact describes the sanctions that shall apply. These include:- (i) Loss or denial of contract; (ii) Forfeiture of the bid or performance bond; (iii) Liability for damages; (iv) Exclusion from bidding on future contracts(debarment); and (v) Criminal or disciplinary action. 10.5.2 Integrity Pact has a monitoring system which provides for independent oversight. The Central Vigilance Commission nominates Independent External Monitors (IEMs) to monitor implementation of Integrity Pact. Thus, IP in its present form has three players – (i) The Principal or the Company / Department, (ii) The Vendor, and (iii) The Independent External Monitor (IEM). Vigilance Manual 2017 271 Chapter - X Preventive Vigilance 10.5.3(a) In order to ensure transparency, equity and competitiveness in public procurement, the Commission has been recommending adoption of Integrity Pact (IP) and implementation by Government organisations. CVC through its Office Order No. 41/12/07 dated 04.12.2007 and No. 43/12/07 dated 28.12.2007 as well as Circular and No. 24/08/08 dated 05.08.2008 recommended adoption of Integrity Pact to all the organisations and provided basic guidelines for its implementation in respect of major procurements in Government Organisations. A Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) was issued by the Commission vide Office Order No. 10/5/09 dated 18.05.2009. (b) The Commission issued clarifications regarding the appointment, tenure and eligibility criteria of IEMs vide Circular No. 008/CRD/013 dated 11.08.2009 and No. 009/VGL/016 dated 19.04.2010. The review system for IEMs was modified vide Circular No. 008/CRD/013 dated 13.8.2010 and clarification regarding tenure of IEMs was issued by the Commission vide its Circular No. 011/VGL/053 dated 23.07.2012. (c) Department of Expenditure vide OM No. 14 (12)/2008– E-II (A) dated 19.07.2011, issued guidelines to all Ministries / Departments / Organisations including their attached / subordinate offices and autonomous bodies for implementation of IP. Also, vide OM No. 14 (12)/2008 – E- II (A) dated 20.07.2011, the Department of Expenditure requested Department of Public Enterprises for issuing directions to the Central Public Sector Enterprises for use of IP. (d) Further, in view of the increasing procurement activities of Public Sector Banks (PSBs), Insurance Companies (ICs) and Financial Institutions (FIs), the Commission vide Circular No. 02/02/2015 dated 25.02.2015 advised that all PSBs, PSICs and FIs shall also adopt and implement the Integrity Pact. 10.5.4 Adoption of Integrity Pact–Standard Operating Procedure; Independent External Monitor: The Commission appointed a Committee in December, 2015 under the Chairmanship of Shri P. Shankar, the former Central Vigilance Commissioner to review the entire scheme of Integrity Pact. After considering the report of the Committee, the Commission has issued a Vigilance Manual 2017 Chapter - X Preventive Vigilance 272 revised Standard Operating Procedure for adoption of Integrity Pact in Government Departments / Organisations vide Circular No. 02/01/2017 dated 13.01.2017. The salient points are as under: (A) Integrity Pact (1) The Pact essentially envisages an agreement between the prospective vendors / bidders and the buyer, committing the persons / officials of both sides, not to resort to any corrupt practices in any aspect / stage of the contract. Only those vendors / bidders, who commit themselves to such a Pact with the buyer, would be considered competent to participate in the bidding process. In other words, entering into this Pact would be a preliminary qualification. The essential ingredients of the Pact include: (a) Promise on the part of the principal not to seek or accept any benefit, which is not legally available; (b) Principal to treat all bidders with equity and reason; (c) Promise on the part of bidders not to offer any benefit to the employees of the Principal not available legally; (d) Bidders not to enter into any undisclosed agreement or understanding with other bidders with respect to prices, specifications, certifications, subsidiary contracts, etc. (e) Bidders not to pass any information provided by Principal as part of business relationship to others and not to commit any offence under PC Act or IPC; (f) Foreign bidders to disclose the name and address of agents and representatives in India and Indian Bidders to disclose their foreign principals or associates; (g) Bidders to disclose the payments to be made by them to agents/brokers or any other intermediary; (h) Bidders to disclose any transgressions with any other company that may impinge on the anti-corruption principle. (2) Integrity Pact, in respect of a particular contract, would be operative from the date IP is signed by both the parties till the final completion of the Vigilance Manual 2017 273 Chapter - X Preventive Vigilance contract. Any violation of the same would entail disqualification of the bidders and exclusion from future business dealings.


INTEGRITY INDEX 10.6.1

 Commission is working on the development of a Comprehensive Integrity Index for organisations. It will be launched shortly. Through the Integrity Index for public organisations the Central Vigilance Commission has decided to adopt a strategy which will ensure transparent, accountable and efficient governance. The Index will be based on bench marking internal processes and controls within an organisation as well as management of relationship and expectation of outside stake holders.The main objectives for which the Integrity Index is to be established are: (i) Define what constitutes Integrity of Public Organisations (ii) Identify the different factors of Integrity and their inter-linkages (iii) Create an objective and reliable tool that can measure the performance of organisations along these above factors (iv) Validate the findings over a period of time to improve upon the robustness of the tool that measures Integrity (v) Create an internal and external ecosystem that promotes working with Integrity where public organisations lead the way. 10.6.2 The Commission has appointed Indian Institute of Management, Ahmadabad as a Consultant for a period of one year to develop the Integrity Index. Based on the survey and extensive consultation with the organisation, the Consultant will: (i) Provide a benchmark of good governance mechanisms needed to combat corruption. (ii) In the preparation of the Index effort will be made to check the existence Vigilance Manual 2017 279 Chapter - X Preventive Vigilance of rules, SOPs and transparency mechanisms designed to deter, prevent or curb corruption and their implementation and enforcement. 10.6.3 The project is designed to cover all the CPSEs and Central Government Ministries / Departments in five years. It is expected that while expansion will take place in the first 2-3 years, the mechanism will stabilise in 2-3 years following that. 10.6.4 In the first year, the Commission has identified 25 CPSEs and Central Government Ministries / Departments to be covered. [Annexure-I] 10.6.5 The organisation in consultation with the consultant will be required to collect data from the internal and external stake holders, conduct workshops and surveys to gather information, evaluate and bench mark the organisations against the Index so developed

Swiss Challenge

9.11 SWISS CHALLENGE To achieve and maintain the targeted rate of growth, development of infrastructure is important. Bottleneck in infrastructure development has been mainly due to non-availability of adequate financial resources, appropriate technical know-how & administrative mechanism to undertake big projects. This calls for active participation from private sector. Swiss Challenge has come up as one of the innovative forms of public procurement, facilitating participation of private sector. Under this method, a public procurement entity receives unsolicited proposal for a public project or service; this proposal is made open by the procuring entity to other parties to match or exceed. In today’s perspective, there have been issues involved in Swiss Challenge method and some of them are as follows:- (a) Consideration of unsolicited offer from an original private proposer, if it has not been so invited; (b) having adequate appreciation of the original proposal vis-à-visactual requirements / public needs of the project; (c) the very scheme of receiving unsolicited proposal from one private agency may result in information asymmetries in the procurement process and absence of equal opportunities to all other parties making matching/ better proposals, leading, in turn, to lack of transparency, fair and equal treatment of potential proposers in the procurement process; (d) setting a reasonable time limit for completion of efficient bidding phase; (e) dealing with counter proposals from other parties, especially so when they offer specifications very much different from those included in the original proposal; (f) looking into reasonableness of the proposals ensuring that all the risks Vigilance Manual 2017 Chapter - IX Chief Technical Examiners’ Organisation 258 involved are duly taken care of and no undue benefit is extended to any of the proposers, at the cost of others; (g) suitable compensation to the original proposer, if any, for his original concept / intellectual property. Keeping in view all the issues, as listed above, a strong legal and regulatory framework to award projects under Swiss Challenge method needs to be in place, before this method of procurement is adopted.

Evolution of CBI - useful for Civil Mains Exam ( Ethics Paper)

EVOLUTION: Special Police Establishment [SPE] was set up in 1941 to investigate bribery and corruption in transactions of the War and Supply Department of India during World War II with its Headquarters in Lahore. Delhi Special Police Establishment Act was brought into force in 1946 which enlarged its scope to cover all Departments of the Government of India. Its jurisdiction extended to the Union Territories, and could be further extended to the States with the consent of the State Governments involved. Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) was set up through a Home Ministry Resolution No. 4/31/61-T dated 1.4.1963 & SPE became one of the constituents of CBI. The Central Government has been empowered under Section 5 to extend to any area (including Railway area) in a State not being a Union Territory, the powers and jurisdiction of members of the DSPE for the investigation of any offence or classes of offences specified in a notification under section 3 of the DSPE Act subject to the consent of the Government of the concerned State, under section 6 of the Act. 6.2 JURISDICTION OF CBI vis-à-vis STATE POLICE: The Special Police Establishment of CBI (Ant-Corruption Division) enjoys with the respective State Police Force concurrent powers of investigation and prosecution under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. However, to avoid duplication of effort, an administrative arrangement has been arrived at with the State Governments according to which: (a) Cases, which substantially and essentially concern Central Government employees or the affairs of the Central Government, even though involving State Government employees, are to be investigated by the SPE. The State Police is, however, kept informed of such cases and will render necessary assistance to the SPE during investigation; (b) Cases, which substantially and essentially involve State Government employees or relate to the affairs of a State Government, even though involving certain Central Government employees, are investigated by the State Police. The SPE is informed of such cases and it extends assistance to the State Police during investigation, if necessary. When the investigation made by the State Police authorities in such cases involves a Central Government employee, the requests for sanction for prosecution of the competent authority of the Central Government will be routed through the SPE. (Refer to Chapter 17 of CBI Crime Manual) 6.3 SUPERINTENDENCE AND ADMINISTRATION OF CBI (i) The genesis of superintendence of CBI has been laid down in the landmark decision of the Supreme Court delivered on 18th December, 1997 in Vineet Narain v/s UOI case. In this judgement, directions were issued that the CVC shall be responsible for the efficient functioning of the CBI. For giving effect to this direction, CVC Act, 2003 was enacted. Section 4 of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 was also amended w.e.f. 01.09.2003, which reads as follows: “4. Superintendence and administration of Special Police Establishment. (1) The superintendence of the Delhi Special Police Establishment in so far as it relates to investigation of offences alleged to have been committed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988), shall vest in the Commission

Protection to Whistle Blowers - useful for Civil Services Main Exam (Ethics Paper)

PROTECTION TO WHISTLEBLOWERS 4.3.1

According to the PIDPI Resolution, following provisions have been made for protection of Whistle Blowers: - (a) Clause 6 - If any person is aggrieved by any action on the ground that he is being victimized due to the fact that he had filed a complaint or disclosure, he may file an application before the designated agency (CVC) seeking redress in the matter, who shall take such action as deemed fit. The designated agency may give suitable directions to the concerned public servant or the public authority as the case may be. (b) Clause 7 - Either on the application of the complainant, or on the basis of the information gathered, if the designated agency is of the opinion that either the complainant or the witnesses need protection, the designated agency shall issue appropriate directions to the concerned Government authorities. (c) Clause 11 – In the event of the identity of the informant being disclosed in spite of the designated agency’s directions to the contrary, the designated agency is authorised to initiate appropriate action as per extant regulations against the person or agency making such disclosure. 4.3.2 The Commission, after receipt of representation(s) from Whistle Blowers about threat to their life, takes up the matter with the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Nodal Agency, to undertake the responsibility of providing security cover to the genuine Whistle Blowers. On the advice of the Ministry of Home Affairs, State Governments / UTs have appointed Nodal Officers and details of such officers nominated by State Governments are furnished to the Commission from time to time by the Ministry of Home Affairs. Chapter - IV PIDPI Complaints Vigilance Manual 2017 87 4.3.3 As regards protection against victimisation or harassment within the Department, the Commission forwards such complaints of Whistle Blowers to the CVO of the concerned organisation for appropriate action.


WHISTLE BLOWERS ACT
The Whistle Blowers Protection Act, 2011 (originally introduced as PUBLIC INTEREST DISCLOSURE AND PROTECTION OF PERSONS MAKING THE DISCLOSURE BILL 2010) has been notified on 12.05.2014. However, the provisions of the Act have not come into force as some amendments to the Act were proposed and a bill to this effect is pending before the Parliament.

Vigilance Manual of CVC

The Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (DoNER), MoS PMO, Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Atomic Energy and Space, Dr Jitendra Singh released the 7^th edition of the Vigilance Manual of Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) here today.

Speaking on the occasion, Dr Jitendra Singh said that continuous efforts are required to update the mechanisms, as the society and the means always keep on changing. He said that the ultimate objective of any society should be to achieve the level of incorruptibility. This is important keeping in view the fact that we are a young and evolving democracy, he added. The Minister further said that the role of society is equally important in curbing corruption, and this task cannot alone be left to Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).

Highlighting the steps taken by the Government under the leadership of Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, he said that the Government has been following a policy of ‘zero tolerance’ towards corruption. He said that the Government has always focused on checking corruption, and at the same time to ensure an environment to every officer to perform without feeling intimidated by anyone. The bureaucracy cannot succeed without providing good governance tools, he added. He said that this environment is important to ensure the policy of ‘minimum government, maximum governance’ and fulfill the aim of citizen-centricity. Dr Jitendra Singh also said that the future of India will depend on the youth who are going to be the change-makers in the society.

Dr Jitendra Singh said that the concept of ‘preventive vigilance’ is the step in right direction. He emphasized that awareness needs to be created in the society on a regular basis for various sections of society. He also complemented the Commission for putting the manual in the public domain.  The Minister emphasized that timeframe is very important in handling the cases related to corruption and the same is being streamlined in the amendments to be made in the Prevention of Corruption Act. Dr Jitendra Singh said that the steps such as online RTI, online Vigilance manual will bring in transparency and good governance in the system.

The Central Vigilance Commissioner Shri KV Chowdary said that this edition was released keeping in view the fact that guidance is required for the people working in this area with the changing times and laws. He said that the first edition was released in the year 1968 after the formation of the Commission in 1964 and the 6^th edition was released in the year 2005 after the Commission became a statutory body in 2003. He said that a lot of changes including automation have happened in the last twelve years, so the new edition of the manual was required. He said that the major iniitative and change is to put the manual in the public domain. The online version is the dynamic one and will be reviewed online. Any changes including changes in the guidelines and court judgments will be updated on a continuous basis, the CVC said. He said that it will act as a reference book for the vigilance practitioners and bring in transparency.  He also said that a new chapter on Preventive Vigilance and separate chapters on Banking and Insurance services have been added in the Manual. Shri KV Chowdary said that the Commission is developing an e-learning module for vigilance officers. The Commission is also shifting to e-office, he added.

The edition released today is the 7^th edition of the Vigilance Manual. The 1^st edition was released in 1968, 2^ndedition of the Manual was released in 1971, 3^rd edition in 1974, 4^th edition in 1982, 5^th edition in 1991. The last edition of the Vigilance Manual was released in the year 2005 and a need was felt to undertake a comprehensive review of the existing Vigilance Manual. The present edition of the Vigilance Manual is a public document accessible through CVC’s website www.cvc.nic.in. The online version has been released along with the printed version for the first time. The 2017 edition of the Vigilance Manual incorporates 567 Paras divided into 11 Chapters with appropriate citations. Eleven chapters include: Vigilance Administration, Appointment, Role, Functions & Responsibilities of Chief Vigilance Officers, Complaints, PIDPI complaint, Preliminary Enquiry, CBI, Disciplinary Proceeding and Suspension, Vigilance Management in PSB & PSIC, CTEO, Preventive Vigilance and some relevant issues.

It has been made a complete document by hyperlinking orders/circulars cited in the Manual (in the online version). This Manual will be a reference for almost all aspects of vigilance administration. Several new topics of vigilance have been included in the present edition. The manual includes numerous guidelines issued by the Chief Technical Examiners’ Organisation of the Central Vigilance Commission. Issues of relevance such as the Standard Operating Procedure in Legal Cases, Procedure for Obtaining and Grant of Vigilance Clearance, Right to Information Act, 2005, International Cooperation against Corruption, Public Participation in Promoting Integrity and Eradicating Corruption and Forensic Science as a Tool for Enquiry/Investigation, etc. have also been included. A comprehensive chapter on the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has also been introduced. The previous edition briefly dealt with ‘facilities and cooperation to be extended with CBI during investigation’. In this edition, a detailed chapter on all aspects of Disciplinary Proceedings and Suspension has also been included.

The Central Vigilance Commission will constantly update it based on the suggestions received from all stakeholders. Previous Modifications/amendments were carried out through Circulars, Guidelines, Instructions etc. issued by the Central Vigilance Commission / DoPT / MHA etc.  These changes have been incorporated in the Manual so as to make it comprehensive and user friendly.

Secretary, DoPT Shri Ajay Mittal, Director CBI Shri Alok Kumar Verma and senior officers of the PMO, CVC, CBI and other Ministries were also present on the occasion.