Page:T.S.R. Subramanian vs Union of India.pdf/31

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

an applicant etc., may go if his case is being unreasonably delayed.

It is necessary that a proper procedure should be devised in consultation with the Central Vigilance Commission for accrediting and approval by the department. Before granting approval the antecedents of the person proposed to be accredited should, if possible, be verified. In any case no person who is not definitely employed by an established undertaking who will be responsible for his contact and actions should be approved.
6.21. It is also desirable that officers belonging to prescribed categories who have to deal with these representatives should maintain a regular diary of all interviews and discussions with the registered representatives whether it takes place in the office or at home. The general practice should be that such interviews should be in the office and if it takes place at home, reasons should be recorded. Any business or discussion which is not so recorded should be deemed to be irregular conduct, of which serious notice should be taken by the superiors.

18. Further, we also notice the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968,which also states that the directions of the officials superior shall ordinarily be in writing. Rule 3(3) of the above-mentioned Rules reads as follows :-

3(3) (i) No member of the Service shall, in the performance of his official duties, or in the exercise of powers conferred on him, act otherwise