|
|
|
|
|
Sales Tax Review |
|
November 2007 |
|
Roving Eye |
-
Mah. Act No. XXI of 2006
Very few people know that the Government of Maharashtra had
promulgated the Maharashtra Government Servants Regulation of Transfers and
Prevention of Delay in Discharge of Official Duties Ordinance, 2003, on 25th
August, 2003. Now, after a gap of around 3 years the said Ordinance has been
replaced by Mah. Act No. XXI of 2006 which is gazetted on 12th May, 2006.
Further, by a separate Gazette Notification No. SRV. 2004/O.C.R. – 15/2004 /
12 dated 25th May, 2006, the said Act has been brought into force. For the
benefit of our members and readers, we are publishing separately in the Review
the said Act and the Notification on which date, the said Act has been brought
into force.
-
In all, the said Act
contains IV Chapters and 16 sections. Important provisions of the said Act
are highlighted and explained below for the information of all concerned.
-
The said Act shall apply to all Govt.
servants in the State services including the All India Service Officers of
the Maharashtra Cadre.
-
Section 2(a) defines "Citizens Charter"
means a list of facilities or services rendered by the office or
Department, together with the time limit for providing such facility or
services to the general public.
-
Section 6 deals with
Transferring Authority. Here below is the Table showing Groups of Govt.
Servants and the Competent Transferring Authority:–
Table
| Sl.No. |
Groups
of Government servants |
Competent Transferring Authority |
| (a)
|
Officers of All India Services, all Officers of State
Services in Group "A" having pay-scale of Rs. 10,650-15,850 and above
|
Chief Minister |
| (b) |
All Officers of State
Services in Group "A" having pay-scales less than Rs. 10,650-15,850 and
all Officers in Group "B". |
Minister-in-charge in consultation with Secretaries of the concerned
Departments. |
| (c)
|
All employees
in Group "C" |
Heads of
Departments |
| (d) |
All employees
in Group "D" |
Regional Heads
of Departments |
N.B:- Two provisos are added to section 6 below the Table
which is not dealt with here.
-
Section 8 deals with prevention of delay in
discharge of official duties. Section 8(1) calls for preparation of citizens
charter by every office or Dept. within a period of 6 months from the date
of commencement of this Act; i.e., 25th May, 2006. To my mind, no office or
Dept. has come out with citizens charter as envisaged under this Act.
Section 8(2) says that if no final decision is taken within the period
specified in the citizens charter by the concerned authorities, the
responsibility for inaction shall be fixed on them and an action mentioned
in the relevant Act, Rules or Regulations shall be taken against them.
However, it should be noted here that the responsibility fixation will arise
only after citizens charter are published under the Act. Let us hope that
the citizens charters are brought out by every office or Dept. as early as
possible to meet the objective of the said Act. Already, it may be stated
that they have breached the legal provision of the said Act.
-
Section 10 deals with
disciplinary action. Section 10(1) says that every Government servant shall
be bound to discharge his official duties and the official work assigned or
pertaining to him most deligently and as expeditiously as possible. Provided
that, normally no file shall remain pending with any
Government servant in the Dept. or office for more than seven working days.
Provided further that, immediate and urgent files shall be disposed of as
per the urgency of the matter, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably
the immediate file in one day or next day morning and the urgent file in
four days. We do not know whether this time-table for disposal of files has
been widely circulated and / or published by way of Circulars by the
Government for the benefit of its subjects. In the absence of its wide
publicity, the ideal provisions of law will remain only on the statute book
and for academic interest only.
-
We therefore request our
enlightened members to take advantage of the above law and wake-up the
Government machinery from its sluggishness and make them active to serve the
society, by using the weapon of the said Act, in addition to RTI Act.
-
RTI Act, 2005
Our professional brothers requested me to obtain
information regarding pending references from the Bombay High Court.
Accordingly, I filed the application under the RTI Act, on
9-10-2007 seeking the information on the following two points:–
-
Kindly give year-wise information till date
regarding pending references registered under the Sales Tax, Central Sales
Tax and Allied Laws administered by the Sales Tax Department, as per the
record maintained at the Bombay High Court.
-
Also, give information regarding any action
plan or time table, if any, drawn by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, about
the disposal of such pending references.
-
In response to the
application, the Section Officer of the Board Dept. of the High Court, vide
letter dated 26-10-2007 gave the following information: -
-
"As regards query No. (i) a
statement showing the pendency of sales tax references as on 30th Sept. 2007
is enclosed.
-
As regards query No. (ii) as
per assignment all the sales tax references are appearing chronologically
before the Division Bench."
HIGH COURT
Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
Statement showing the pendency of sales tax reference on
30th September, 2007
|
Year |
No. of
sales tax
references |
Remark |
|
2000 |
7 |
Already on board
of Hon’ble Shri Justice F.I. Rebello and Shri. J.P. Devadhar |
|
2001 |
8 |
-do- |
|
2002 |
8 |
-do- |
|
2003 |
20 |
-do- |
|
2004 |
9 |
-do- |
|
2005 |
16 |
-do- |
|
2006 |
2 |
-do- |
|
2007 |
70 |
-do- |
Sd/-
Section Officer
Date: 1st October, 2007 Board Department
-
Say "No!" to corruption, on the Eve of Vigilance Awareness
Week
Part-I
Under the above campaign for a week commencing on 12th
November every year, the Head of the Dept. takes and administers the oath ‘Say
"No!" to Corruption’. Despite the above yearly ritual, there is no remarkable
improvement in corruption eradication or controlling its widespread effect in
all walks of life.
-
In this connection, as you
know, where a State Government official asks for a bribe for performing
official duty and if you do not wish to bribe him, you are asked to lodge a
complaint with Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB). The bribe money so decided is
required to be arranged by the complainant and deposited in advance to lay a
trap by the ACB, so that the person asking for the bribe is caught
red-handed. Obviously, in such a situation, the complainant’s money given to
ACB to arrange a trap is thereafter deposited in the Court by way of
evidence. And the money is returned to the complainant on disposal of the
case. This procedure was discouraging the complainant to approach the ACB to
lay a trap for the bribe seeker official. Now, this position is publicly
accepted by the Home Minister Shri R.R. Patil in a TOI Report dated
14-11-2007, which we are publishing as an extension of this column. Indeed
the whole approach in this connection by the Government so far, is highly
unacceptable to any sane mind. Anyway, the dead slow machinery of the
Government realized this sad position and is going to change it on the eve
of ‘Vigilance Awareness Week’ celebrated last week, as per the promise of
Home Minister Shri. R.R. Patil.
Part-II
CORRUPTION IN CONSTRUCTION SECTOR IS LARGER
Courtesy: - Business Standard report dated 16-11-2007.
Q & A - R.H. Tahiliani, Chairman, Transparency
International India
Integrity Pact or IP – aimed at ensuring that no bribes
are given or taken – is the new buzzword in the corridors of government –
owned companies. The companies that have signed these pacts with the India
Chapter of the Berlin-based Transparency International include PSU majors
such as GAIL (India), Coal India, Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC),
Steel, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation, Steel Authority of India, National
and Mineral Development Corporation and Rashtriya Ispat Nigam. In fact, 12
of the 14 companies that signed the pact, did so in the last six months. And
standing in queue are Oil India, Engineers India, Container Corporation,
NTPC, Indian Oil Corporation, Bharat Heavy Electricals, Bharat Sanchar Nigam
and Neyveli Liginite Corporation. However, Admiral (Retd.) R.H. Tahiliani,
the Chairman of Transparency International India, tells Vandana Gombar that
a lot of corruption still remains to be uncovered.
Excerpts:
-
“What is the reason for the sudden rush of companies
signing the Integrity Pact?
I have been trying to push the Integrity Pact for the
last six years. The tide changed after I briefed the Central Vigilance
Commission (CVC). They became fully supportive. My first target was the
Ministry of Defence, which has adopted IP for deals greater than Rs. 100
crore in value. From the corporate sector, ONGC was the first to come on
board in April 2006. Their experience has been very healthy, with Rs. 34,000
crore worth of contracts signed since then, and no one has gone to court or
asked for arbitration.
All ministerial intervention is reported to have stopped.
Then there was a rush of pacts in 2007, as companies realized that it was a
good way to end political interference. Bidders were also happy to abide by
the pact since it reduces their costs.
-
Is there a quantitative estimate of what has been the
saved by curbing corruption?
The experience of companies worldwide is that there is a
10-15 per cent improvement in the bottomline.
-
So should private companies adopt it?
So far, we have not targeted the private companies. TISCO
has, however, shown interest and approached us.
-
How are you tackling the opposition to such pacts by the
beneficiaries of these payoffs?
I have seen that if the top management, the chief
executive, is committed to cleaning up the system, it works.
-
What happens if bribes are given and taken despite the
Integrity Pact?
First the case will go to CVC, and the next step is to go
to the public. We have not had to do that so far. If a supplier company is
implicated, it could end up paying penalties and being blacklisted from
future contracts for a certain period.
-
How are you funded?
We are a 100 per cent politically-neutral body, supported
by the Servants of the People Society (SOPS). We rely on donations from
other non-governmental organizations (like the Irish Concern Worldwide) as
well as the companies we work with such as Coal India and ONGC. These
donations also fund our studies on corruption – from grand larceny to petty
corruption.”
|
|
|