STATE GOVERNMENT IS RESPONSIBLE TO FOLLOW PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 AND DECIDE PENDING COMPLAINT OF STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AFTER COMPLETION OF REGULAR INVESTIGATION, DEMANDED BY SHRI CHATTER SINGH CHOUDHARY (PAONTA SAHIB)

The Government is responsible to follow prevention of corruption Act, 1988 and decide pending Complaints under this purview of the advice for consideration before the Chief Secretary and the Chief Minister, as the case may be, but it is regretted to point the delay and dereliction of duty on the captioned subject, as pointed out by the RTI Activist and president of the Paonta Sahib unit of the RTI activists Group and Society working for the welfare of society and circle and doing needful under law code manual. It is not understood that what is the difference of opinion between the vigilance department and the Administrative Department regarding the implementation of the advice given by the vigilance department, where in the record pertinent to the said financial theft is issued by the department concerned and the State Electricity Board, list by way and virtue of which the department of administration and the state electricity board is responsible to record reasons in writing for its inability to accept the advice of the Vigilance department and decide accordingly to its original views, as such its advice will be acted upon by the administrative Department or else the latter may submit the matter for the consideration of the Chief Secretary and the Chief Minister of the state Government, as the case may be. Keeping in view the above position of case it is necessary to complete the investigation of the pending case and decide pending issue and matter in the interest of justice to the public and required for the eradication of corruption under the purview of departmental enquiries for which representation of the RTI activist Shri Chatter Singh Choudhry is still pending for under rule obligation before the state government and the department of vigilance and the complainant compelling for the decision of enquiry case resulted our under the RTI act, 2005 but still pending for final conclusion of the decision-making , at government levels, responsible for the prosecution sanction under section 19 , of the prevention of corruption Act, 1988 , where it is necessary for the prosecuting authority to have the previous sanction of the appropriate administrative authority for launching prosecution against the public servant:-- Er Fateh chand Guleria, Director RTI welfare Association registered number HPCD, 3552 , Bilaspur Himachal Pradesh phone number, 9459334377