Wednesday, 21 October 2026
Breaking News
TRIBUTES PAID TO MARTYRS AT DISTRICT-LEVEL POLICE COMMEMORATION EVENT KEY SUSPECT NOT HELD EVEN AFTER 25 DAYS, DEMAND FOR CBI INQUIRY IN AJAY MURDER CASE RISES DRINKING WATER FACILITY INAUGURATED AFTER RENOVATION CM LAUNCHES HELICOPTER SERVICE FROM SANJAULI TO RAMPUR, FULFILS HIS PROMISE SUGARCANE BAN ON ETHANOL TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON PUNJAB’S FARMERS, INDUSTRIES AND GROUNDWATER 57 CHITKARA UNIVERSITY RESEARCHERS FEATURE AMONG THE WORLD’S TOP 2 PERCENT SCIENTISTS IN STANFORD–ELSEVIER REPORT HINDUS SEEK PRE-SCREENING OF “RAMAYANA” FOR HINDU SCHOLARS WORLDWIDE TO ENSURE SCRIPTURAL INTEGRITY SHIV KANWAR SINGH SANDHU PASSES AWAY, BHOG AND ANTIM ARDAS ON OCTOBER 23 IN CHANDIGARH POISON ON THE PLATE: BREAK THE ADULTERATION MAFIA, SPARE THE SMALL TRADER CHANDIGARH LIQUOR WORTH RS 72 LAKH RECOVERED FROM TRUCK ON BHARAT MALA EXPRESS HIGHWAY
Haryana Trending

HIGH COURT GRANTS 2 WEEKS TO HARYANA GOVT TO RE-CONSIDER ITS TWO CIRCULARS MAKING IT MANDATORY FOR OFFICERS OF VIGILANCE BUREAU TO SEEK PERMISSION OF HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

Read in:English

(MOREPIC1)  Chandigarh (Subhash Jindal)

Punjab and Haryana High Court grants two weeks time to Haryana Government to re-consider its two circulars making it mandatory for officers of Vigilance Bureau to seek permission of Head of Department, Deputy Commissioner, or of Administrative Secretary, before conducting a trap against a corrupt employee: 

A PIL filed by advocate H.C.Arora, challenging circulars dated April 13th, 1972, and further circular dated January 24th, 1990, making it mandatory for officers of Vigilance Bureau to seek permission of Head of Department, Deputy Commissioner, or of Administrative Secretary, before conducting a trap against a corrupt employee, came up for resumed hearing today before a division bench of the HC comprising Chief Justice and Justice Arun Palli.(SUBHEAD)

The HC Bench expressed its prima facie view that the two circulars appeared to be in conflict with the judgment of Supreme Court of India in case of Vineet Narain (1997). in the said case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India had categorically held that any provision requiring prior permission of the Government, before conducting a trial on a Government servant would be arbitrary and illegal.

That in the PIL,, the petitioner had submitted that any such requirement to seek permission of Head of the Department, the Deputy Commissioner or the Administrative Secretary of the Department, as the case be, would protect the corrupt employees, and would frustrate any such trap against the employee, for the purpose of catching hold of such employee while taking bribe.

The HC Bench categorically told the Law Officer of the Haryana Government, that the impugned circulars issued by the Haryana Government are clearly in violation of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Vineet Narain (1997) and granted two weeks’ time to the Government of Haryana, to file an affidavit as to whether it still supports the circulars dated April 13, 1972 and further circular dated January 24th 1990, despite the subsequent judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of (i) Vineet Narain (1997); and (ii) in the case of Dr. Subramanian Swamy (2014).

 

0 Comments
15,596 articles
View all articles