“Umashankar’s suspension smacks of victimisation”
Special Correspondent News » States » Tamil Nadu
CHENNAI, August 5, 2010
AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa has alleged that suspension of IAS officer C. Umashankar smacked of victimisation by the DMK government.
In a statement here on Wednesday, Ms. Jayalalithaa questioned the powers of the State government to place an IAS officer under suspension on the pretext that he had entered the Civil Services using a bogus community certificate.
“All civil service appointments in the country are done by the Union Public Service Commission. It is the responsibility of the UPSC to vet the antecedents of every recruit and verify their certificates,” she said.
She said the DMK government’s claim that Mr. Umashankar, belonging to Dalit community, had entered the service using a forged community certificate had given room for speculation on the reasons behind this.
Ms. Jayalalithaa recalled the government’s decision to launch Arasu Cable Corporation and the appointment of Mr. Umashankar as its Managing Director, and said the real motive behind it was to pose a challenge to the Maran brothers’ Sumangali Cable Vision (SCV).
Ms. Jayalalithaa said after an agreement was suddenly reached between the warring cousins of Mr. Karunanidhi’s family, the IAS officer was made the scapegoat and shunted out.
She alleged that though Mr. Umashankar was appointed as the MD of Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu (ELCOT), he was removed from the post because he questioned the disappearance of ETL Infrastructure Ltd., a subsidiary of ELCOT, along with Rs. 700 crore assets.
Demanding an explanation from Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi on what happened to ETL and the fate of the Rs. 400 crore invested in Arasu Cable Corporation, she wanted to know why was a Dalit officer in government service being victimised.
Keywords: C. Umashankar, AIADMK, DMK
Archive for the ‘Whistleblowers’ Category
Posted by egovindia on August 5, 2010
“Umashankar’s suspension smacks of victimisation”
Posted in Andhra Pradesh eGovernance, Corruption in egovernance, COURTS in INDIA, DIT - MIT -, eGovINDIA Group, NANO Tech, NIC, NISG, NKC, RTI, Tamilnadu eGovernance, UNDP -NISG - NASSCOM, Whistleblowers, Worldbank | Leave a Comment »
Posted by egovindia on July 13, 2006
Posted by egovindia on July 13, 2006
Posted by egovindia on July 7, 2006
martyr SKD wrote: Don’t remember me or my work, just one request, remember my message
A dream project of unparalleled importance to the Nation but in reality a great loot of public money because of very poor implementation at every state.
Death of a Whistleblower
Where is JUSTICE for martyr SKD ? Are all PROMISES ? Including one by BROTHER DKD ? What happened to Brother DKD ? WAS he SILENCED from SKDF USA by paying USA Dollars? What happened to TWO Directors of SKDF USA, Who have used the CONTRIBUTED FUNDS ? What happened to the PROMISES of Atal Bansal to find KILLERS of martyr SKD ? What happened to Atal Bansal’s STATEMENT that SKDF USA will FUND to find the KILLERS and to get JUSTICE for martyr SKD ?
Entire Story GOOD and BAD what has happened:
Posted by egovindia on July 5, 2006
|Wipro to introduce `Whistle Blower Policy’|
|The company has already adopted an Ombudsprocess policy wherein it has established procedures for receiving, retaining and treating complaints received|
|Monday, June 26, 2006|
BANGALORE: Wipro Ltd is looking at strengthening its Ombudsprocess by introducing new Whistle Blower Policy. This will enable employees to raise their concerns about any malpractice, impropriety, abuse or wrongdoing at an early stage without fear of victimisation, subsequent discrimination or disadvantage.
Disclosing this in the SEC filing, the company said that it may establish a mechanism for employees to report to the management concerns about unethical behavior, actual or suspected fraud or violation of the company’s code of conduct or ethics policy. This mechanism could also provide for adequate safeguards against victimisation of employees who avail of the mechanism and also provide for direct access to the chairman of the audit committee in exceptional cases. Once established, the existence of the mechanism may be appropriately communicated within the organisation.
“The company has adopted an Ombudsprocess policy wherein it has established procedures for receiving, retaining and treating complaints received, and procedures for the confidential and anonymous submission by employees of complaints regarding possible violations of the code of conduct and ethics,” said company filings.
Under this policy, Wipro employees are encouraged to report questionable accounting matters, any reporting of fraudulent financial or other information to the stakeholders, any conduct that results in violation of the company’s code of business conduct and ethics, to management (on an anonymous basis, if employees so desire). Likewise, under this policy, the company has prohibited discrimination, retaliation or harassment of any kind against any employees who, based on the employee’s reasonable belief that such conduct or practice have occurred or are occurring, reports that information or participates in the investigation. “No personnel of the company has been denied access to the audit committee or its chairman,” said the company.
© CyberMedia News
PARLIAMENT OF INDIA – RAJYA SABHA – DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES, LAW AND JUSTICE
Posted by egovindia on June 19, 2006
PARLIAMENT OF INDIA
DEPARTMENT-RELATED PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE
PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES, LAW AND JUSTICE
DEMANDS FOR GRANTS (2004-2005)
OF THE MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES
(PRESENTED TO THE RAJYA SABHA ON 26 AUGUST, 2004)
(LAID ON THE TABLE OF THE LOK SABHA ON 26 AUGUST, 2004)
RAJYA SABHA SECRETARIAT
AUGUST, 2004/ BHADRAPADA (SAKA)
C O N T E N TS
CHAPTER – I ——- OVERVIEW OF THE MINISTRY
CHAPTER –III——POLICIES, PROGRAMMES AND SCHEMES OF THE MINISTRY
4*. OBSERVATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS AT A GLANCE
5*. RELEVANT MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEE
(i) Parliamentary Bulletin (Rajya Sabha) Part Ii No. 41502, Dated 20 July, 2004
Regarding Amendments to Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the
1. Shri E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappan ¾ Chairman
2. Dr. Radhakant Nayak
3. Dr. M.S. Gill
4. Shri Balavant alias Bal Apte
5. Shri Ram Nath Kovind
6. Shri Varinder Singh Bajwa
7. Shri V.V. Raghavan
8. Shri Ram Jethmalani
9. Dr. P.C. Alexander
11. Dr. Shafiqurrahman Barq
12. Smt. Bhavani Rajenthiran
13. Shri Chhatter Singh Darbar
14. Justice (Retd.) N.Y. Hanumanthappa
15. Shri Shailendra Kumar
16. Smt. Kiran Maheshwari
17. Shri Dahyabhai V. Patel
18. Shri Brajesh Pathak
19. Shri Harin Pathak
20. Shri V. Radhakrishnan
21. Shri Vishwendra Singh
22. Shri Bhupendrasinh Solanki
23. Prof. Vijaya Kumar Malhotra
Shri Tapan Chatterjee, Joint Secretary
Shri Surinder Kumar Watts, Deputy Secretary
Smt. Sunita Sekaran, Under Secretary
Ms. S. Pankajavalli, Committee Officer
I, the Chairman of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice, having been authorised by the Committee to submit the Report on its behalf, do hereby present this First Report on Demands for Grants (2004-2005) pertaining to the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions.
2.0 The Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice consisting of 31 Members (21 from Lok Sabha and 10 from Rajya Sabha), came into existence consequent upon amendments to Third and Fifth Schedules to Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Council of States and Lok Sabha, respectively, on 20 July 2004 (Appendix-I). The present Committee constituted on 5 August, 2003 with 22 Members (9 from Rajya Sabha and 13 from Lok Sabha) leaving nine vacancies,
2.1 Two Ministries (Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions and Law and Justice) comprising six Departments (three in each Ministry) which were within the remit of Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, since creation of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on 31 March, 1993, till 19 July, 2004, are now under the purview of its jurisdiction.
3.0 For the period spanning from the financial years 1993-94 to 2003-04, the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, with 45 Members (15 from Rajya Sabha and 30 from Lok Sabha), have examined Demands for Grants pertaining to the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions every year, submitted Reports* thereon to Parliament.
4. The newly created Committee heard the views of the Secretary (Personnel) and Director (CBI) at its sitting held on 12 August, 2004.
5. The Committee, while making its observations/recommendations has mainly relied upon the following: –
(i) Presentations made by the officers of the Ministry;
(ii) Detailed Demands for Grants of the Ministry for the year 2004-2005;
(iii) Detailed Demands for Grants of the Union Public Service Commission for the year 2004-2005;
(iv) Explanatory Note on the Demands for Grants (2004-2005) received from the Ministry;
(v) Annual Report of the Ministry for the year 2003-2004;
(vi) Annual Report of the Union Public Service Commission for the year 2001-2002;
(vii) Annual Report of the Central Vigilance Commission for the year 1.1.2001-31.12.2001;
(viii) Annual Report (2003) of CBI;
(ix) Action Taken Notes on the recommendations of Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs contained in its Ninety-ninth Report on Demands for Grants (2003-2004) of the Ministry;
(x) Action Taken Note on the recommendations of the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs contained in its Ninety-eighth Report on Demands for Grants (2003-2004) of the Ministry of Home Affairs (in so far it related to CBI);
(xi) Written replies furnished by the Ministry on the Questionnaires sent to it by the Secretariat;
(xii) Written clarifications to the points/issues raised by Members in the meeting of the Committee held on 12 August 2004.
5.1 The Committee considered and adopted the Report at its sitting held on 23 August, 2004.
6. For the facility of reference and convenience, the observations and recommendations of the Committee have been printed in bold letters in the body of the Report.
August 23, 2004
E.M. SUDARSANA NATCHIAPPAN
Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice