PDR exposes serious irregularities in LMCP Dept

PDR exposes serious irregularities in LMCP Dept
+100%-

Office Peon is now an Inspector in the Department

Dimapur, June 17: In what appears to be a case that defies any logic, a peon appointed in October, 2007 in the State Legal Metrology and Consumer Protection (LMCP) Department has risen to the rank of Inspector in the same department by March 2014.
This was revealed by the People for Democratic Rights (PDR) citing RTI disclosures from the LMCP Department.
According to PDR, as per RTI disclosure of 2011-2012, the designation of a certain male employee is shown as peon in Kohima District Office. RTI disclosure 2012-2013 still mentions his designation as peon with date of birth as 05-10-1992 and ‘Date of first appointment’ as 10-10-2007. However, in RTI disclosure of 2014-2015 the same person with same date of birth as mentioned in previous RTI disclosures is mentioned as an Inspector with ‘Date of first appointment’ as 04-03-2014. Additionally, RTI disclosure of 2016-17 mentions the same person’s ‘Date of entry into service/first appointment’ and ‘Date of appointment to present post’ as 04-03-2014.
“The contradictory dates of entry into service in different RTI disclosures reflect a clear picture of manipulation/backdoor appointment. This is a case of a Peon being promoted to the post of an Inspector, a post covered under NPSC. If the case is not of a Peon being promoted to Inspector, then the different dates of entry into service clearly shows manipulation of service records to make backdoor appointments,” it said.
PDR also pointed out that in 2012-13 RTI disclosure, under the ‘father’s name’ column, the peon mentions only the last name of his father whereas in the rest of RTI disclosures, the peon, who is now an Inspector, uses only the first name of the father. The PDR alleged that the different/incomplete names of father provided “is to hoodwink the public and government that the Peon and the Inspector were different persons whereas the two are the one and same person with same date of birth and there is only one person by that name in the employee list.”
PDR also revealed that as per another 2012-13 RTI disclosure, a certain female who came out through NPSC as an Inspector is shown as appointed on 15-10-2011. However, PDR said she did not accept the post but her name continues to feature in the employee list as per other RTI disclosures of the department.
“The question is who was drawing salary in her name all these years? She got SDO through technical exam. Her name ceased to exist in the RTI disclosure of 2016-17,” it said.
The PDR, citing RTI disclosures, revealed various anomalies regarding backdoor appointments, ghost names, and double names within the Department, contradictory appointment dates, early promotion against laid down rules etc.
“All such irregularities concern close relations of certain officers in the Department by manipulating and rewriting existing official records,” it alleged.
The PDR alleged that several appointments were made in 2013 with ghost names and their salaries were drawn for years. However, their names no more feature in the RTI disclosure of 2016-17.
“All these irregularities in the Department exhibit an uncontrolled high degree of manipulation and nepotism practised by those in powerful positions. Out of turn promotions and backdoor appointments are a serious matter which needs to be deeply inquired into,” it stated.
PDR also stated that manipulated/contradictory RTI disclosures submitted to the Nagaland State Information Commission (NSIC) needs an inquiry by the appropriate authority. “Misleading the public with false information through the very RTI Act meant to provide honest and truthful disclosures and by the very Department meant to protect the interest of the consumers and public should be dealt with appropriately,” it said while appealing to the Chief Information Commissioner, Nagaland to take urgent cognizance of such manipulated/false RTI disclosures submitted to its office and take action upon the department and officers for misleading the high office of NSIC and the public.
The PDR also demanded proper explanation from the LMCPD into these issues at the earliest and to take immediate action, failing which it would be compelled to disclose the names of the appointees and the names of those officers under whose hands the appointments/manipulations were made and their relation with the appointees thereof. (Page News Service)