Jump to content
Atul Patankar

Over 300 DDA employees face corruption charges

Recommended Posts

Atul Patankar

As reported at indianexpress.com on Sept 16, 2009


New Delhi : High-ranking officials are among over 300 employees of Delhi Development Authority (DDA) who are facing anti-corruption cases, some of which are pending for more than two decades. Out of the total 305 cases, 167 were being investigated by its own Vigilance departments, 72 by Anti-Corruption Branch of Delhi Government and 66 were probed by the Central Bureau of Investigations. The corruption cases were pending against top officers like commissioner, directors, joint directors and deputy directors. Even the superintendent engineers and executive engineers were facing vigilance enquiries.

A total of 39 junior engineers, 11 assistant engineers, six executive engineers and three superintendent engineers among others are found to be allegedly involved in graft charges. Surprisingly, 18 senior officials from DDA retired without completing the pending probe against them.

The revelation came in response to an RTI filed by a social activist, Vivek Garg who sought details of pending corruption cases against DDA employees.

"It is surprising to know that despite several measures, authorities at DDA have failed to curb the menace of corruption," Garg said.

According to a senior official, the strength of Delhi Development Authority is about 22,000. Commissioner (Planning) Vijay Risbud, Directors V K Singhal and Jagdish Chander, Senior PS Ashok Kapoor, three Assistant Engineers Kapoil Deo, P S Rai, S C Verma and 15 junior engineers are among 66 officers against whom cases were registered by the CBI, the RTI reply said.

Whereas, cases were also pending against R C Jain and A K Sharma, both Superintendent Engineers, who have been superannuated from the DDA, it said. Out of the total 72 cases registered by the Anti-Corruption Branch of Delhi Government, four were against assistant engineers and seven were against junior engineers.

The cases were pending against Assistant Engineers S C Garg, Raghunandan, I S Panwar, Brijesh Kumar Garg and Junior Engineers Raj Kumar Malhotra, R C Jai, M S Anand, Kailash Chand Verma, Rajesh Kumar Baliyan, Sat Pal Dabas and Suresh Chand Solanki, the reply said.

The Vigilance Departmental cases were also pending against P M Parate, Director, Joint Director Shashi Kant, Deputy Directors K K Marwah and J B Malik, Executive Engineers S N Paul, S S Bhalla, A K Goel, Lalit Kumar, I J Gupta, Vijay Kumar and Assistant Engineers Shyamlal Singh and B P Badolait, the RTI response said.




Source: Over 300 DDA employees face corruption charges

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think to arrest corruption the implimention of restriction on maximum year a staff serve in senistive post must be implimented .


as below is CVC circular.



Dwarka Forum




Government of India


Central Vigilance Commission




Satarkta Bhawan, Block ‘A’,


GPO Complex, INA,


New Delhi – 110 023


Dated the 15


th April 1999



All Chief Vigilance Officers


Subject: Rotation of officials working in sensitive posts.




Instructions have been issued from time to time by the Central Vigilance


Commission and the Department of Personnel and Training for making rotational transfers in


respect of the officials posted on sensitive posts at periodic intervals. These instructions are


not being strictly followed and fallen into disuse.


2. In order to implement these instructions in a letter and spirit, it has been


decided by the Commission that a list of sensitive posts in various Departments/



should be identified by the Chief Vigilance Officer of the Department/Organisation. A list of


posts so identified by the CVOs may be intimated to the Commission immediately.


Thereafter CVOs in consultation with the Chief Executives would ensure that officials posted


on sensitive posts are rotated every two/three years to avoid developing vested interests. In


case officials posted on the sensitive posts continue to function in violation of the existing


orders, the Commission may be apprised so that it may take up the matter with the concerned


Departments/Organisations for implementing these instructions.





Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • karira
      By karira
      Officials in a fix over Samal report
      HYDERABAD: Officials in the State Vigilance Commission seem to have been caught in the proverbial Catch 22 situation over the controversial ‘Samal report.’
      Whether a copy of this ‘report’ can be obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act still remains a million-dollar question. After the 56-page report was released to media by former Vigilance Commissioner R.C. Samal soon after demitting office on September 7, the Vigilance Commission received two petitions under the Act, seeking copies of the ‘report’.
      Official version
      Confirming that a couple of petitioners have sought the copies of the report under the RTI Act, a senior Vigilance Commission official says: “As per the Act, we have to accept every petition and we have done so in these two cases also.”
      No report submitted
      While Chief Minister Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy has admitted that Mr. Samal has not submitted any annual report to the Government, sources say that the report that caused ripples was just a press statement and had no “official sanctity.”
      Interestingly, officials are indeed in a dilemma as to whether or not to classify the report as ‘official’.
      ‘A puzzle’
      A section of officials argue that it cannot be construed as an official report since Mr. Samal has not submitted it to the Government.
      The other argument is that even if it has not been submitted to the Government, the mere preparation of the report by the Vigilance Commissioner should be treated as an official document. That whether Mr. Samal had ‘leaked’ the complete report verbatim or parts of it remains a puzzle.
      Officials in the State Information Commission (SIC), however, feel that a copy of such a report can be given only if it is ‘official’. “We have not received any request so far from any individual,” they say.
      The Hindu : Andhra Pradesh / Hyderabad News : Officials in a fix over Samal report
    • sidmis
      By sidmis
      The Central Vigilance Commission does not want its files opened to public scrutiny under the Right to Information Act.
      The CVC, Directorate General of Income Tax, the Railway Protection Force and a slew of government agencies have sought exemption from the RTI act, India’s transparency law, the government disclosed today.
      Responding to a question in the Rajya Sabha today, minister of state for personnel and training Suresh Pachauri said 16 government bodies had written to the ministry, asking for exemption.
      The armed forces (the army, navy, air force and the coast guard) wanted immunity for security reasons, but their appeal was turned down.
      The office of secretary (security) at the cabinet secretariat and the Bureau of Civil Aviation (security) sought exemption on identical grounds, and were also turned down.
      The Special Protection Group, the Defence Research and Development Organisation, Border Road Development Board and the Financial Intelligence Unit are the only bodies that have been excluded from the act’s purview, Pachauri said.
      New Delhi, Nov. 22
      The Telegraph - Calcutta : Nation


  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy