Venom spitting dragon named Vigilance

“These are all replies, like of which you are carrying, some of them are several years old and simply gathering dust here, none has time and patience to read them, much less, dispense ‘justice’ after going through them”

An Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) officer was nominated as evaluator for the departmental promotion examination from Group ‘C’ to Group ‘B’ Gazetted. As it happens, the eligibility is laid down as to who all can apply/compete. Certain eligible employees (three to be exact) were on deputation to Vigilance wing of Railways. As the luck would have it, they failed to qualify the written test. This perhaps bruised their ego little too deep how the hell they could fail? Of what use it is to be in vigilance department, if you can not become officer!

Now hear this:

One day I came to know that the Vigilance team wants to confiscate the answer sheets (around 250) of this particular exam. The exam having been over, result declared and successful candidates having joined, there was apparently no objection in parting with the answer sheets.

As per SOP, Vigilance is supposed to have some complaint anonymous or by name to take this action, not a difficult feat if vested interest is involved. An authorization from a middle manager of Vigilance is sufficient to ask for such ‘papers’.

The answer sheets were handed over and apparently the three Vigilance Inspectors who failed to qualify the written exam scanned the answer sheets under a fine microscope. In bureaucracy, as in any other similar set- up, it is not impossible to come across ‘errors’ which can not be magnified and interpreted as malafide.

Promptly a detailed Questionnaire was given to me asking all kinds of related and not so related questions about the evaluation. Inter-alia it was pointed out to Vigilance-

A: Essay type answers are purely on the discretion of the evaluating officer and no bias can be attributed as the answer sheets are given coded numbers, thus, the evaluator cannot know whose answer sheet he/she is evaluating.

B: The Evaluator (that’s me) has been evaluating answer sheets for the last 10 years and never a finger is pointed towards the sanctity of his evaluation.

This provoked Vigilance to the extent that they just forgot all about issues raised in item ‘A’ above but concentrated on item ‘B’, with the result they combed an earlier selection with a very fine comb and came out with again some silly inconsequential ‘errors’ (malafide for them).

In my reply I was supported by my General Manager who wrote notes after notes endorsing my stand. The SDGM (The Vigilance Lord) is not bound to accept GM’s opinion/directions. As per procedure he can put his counter observation and forward the case with his recommendations to the Ministry, where the concerned Member also gives his observation/recommendations and the case is sent to Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) through the Chairman who generally signs on the dotted lines. So within a year, not one but two major penalty charge sheets were served to me, just when I had 4 months to superannuate. They had cleverly given one charge sheet for each of the two examinations. By then I was working on a higher, independent post as the Head of the Department (PHOD).

As the saying goes if you are visiting Simla, the hills start from Kalka onwards. So, your fun trip begins from Kalka onward, in the sense fun journey begins. Similarly, once you are served with chargesheet major or minor your torture, harassment and humiliation begins.. you may eventually be found ‘Not Guilty’ and absolved of all the charges but not before arduous three to five years of running around, painfully slow inquiry with taareekh par taareekh.

The mental tension and physical pain I went through cannot be put in words. Reams of paper was used by me to draft my reply, modify reply, (I had sleepless nights week after week) consultation with senior sympathetic officers, astrologers, organizing suggested Poojas and visits to temples.

Every one though agreed that it is baseless and will not stand the scrutiny of court.. but I was in no mental condition to undergo humiliation of silly, time-consuming Inquiry/court proceedings. I was very well familiar with their working in my thirty plus years of service.

Since I was under shadow so I could not conduct exams nor could I hold independent post. Promptly, I was drafted for one training after another. Imagine you have two months to retire and the organization sends you for training. But that suited me, it was better than to be on ‘forced leave’.

During one such training in Delhi I visited an old colleague and explained my case to him, he was convinced and took me to the officer whose section was dealing with the case. This kindly officer saw the thick wand of papers in my hand and indicated towards pile of files lying helter skelter in his chamber ‘these are all replies, like of which you are carrying, some of them are several years old and simply gathering dust here. None has time and patience to read them, much less, dispense ‘justice’ after going through them’.

What is it you want: To pursue the case, come what may and have the (ego) satisfaction of being found ‘Not Guilty’ after three to five years of running around, OR Get rid of the case. And forget all about it.

I confided in him that I have no pretension of pride, of what use is my ego/pride which will take torturous journey and harassment of 3 to 5 years before the conclusion. The kind officer had suggested me the path.

I met my Member and shared with him my desire to ‘admit’ charges. He looked surprised and asked me “You know the meaning of this? you may be penalised”. I replied in affirmative and informed him I have no physical energy and mental make up to pursue the case, so better it is to admit and be done with it.

With the help of same very kind officer I drafted my confession and after a week I was ‘let off’ with a lightest possible penalty. I am forever grateful to understanding and helping people in this chain.

I cannot describe in words the feeling of great relief.

TAKE AWAYS:

1. My senior officer to whom I was showing my replies to the questionnaire and who was fine tuning my reply, when his remarks were called upon officially on the file, he did not write a single word in my favour rather wrote beautiful English (English, of which he so often declared to have mastery over) hurting my cause.
2. Another officer ‘friend’ I looked upon for help due to his posting in Vigilance Commission, though much junior to me stopped taking my calls.
3. Well ! Vigilance Inspectors, I can understand but alas even Vigilance Head refused to see reason and was so very easily swayed by the perverse PE (Preliminary Enquiry).
4. I knew from the very beginning that mine was not the first case nor was it going to be the last one, so I suggested to the ‘Rule Maker friends’ to bring an amendment thereby temporarily debarring all those candidates who are on deputation and once back in their ‘parent’ cadre they could participate in very next selection and if qualify would be given seniority from the date they were eligible, while on deputation to avoid this kind of bravado involving loss of peace and face.

Railway Board has since then introduced a reform by way of introducing 100% objective type/Multi Choice Questions, thus, seemingly eliminating the element of subjectivity.

These are few of the innumerable examples, when I met ‘friends in power and position’ forget, any help, they looked other way.

As the saying goes when you are down and under the passers-by also love to kick you.

“You laugh the world laughs with you; you cry and you cry alone”.