Imperative fast-tracking

Divorcing a spouse is easier in our country than terminating an errant employee. Sometimes I wonder whether the condition of poverty is a bigger issue or the non-performance of those who are blessed with high-paying jobs. Let's take examples of municipal, sanitation, water etc. departments in some state. Aren't we often let down by being transferred from one official to another, coupled with the irresponsible responses of the concerned officials being on leave or taking an extended lunch break, ultimately resulting in work not being done? There is a need to revamp our age-old, lengthy disciplinary procedures.

According to Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India, no civil servant can be dismissed, removed, or reduced in rank except after an inquiry and after being given a reasonable opportunity to be heard in respect of charges levelled against him or her. This provision alone calls for a detailed disciplinary enquiry, which sometimes takes years, all in the name of the principles of natural justice.

Non-performance has been the toughest issue in our system for ages, with the culprit being tedious procedures. Most disputes in employment law pending in courts today pertain to the imposition of penalties, which could be for reasons such as non-performance, fraud, rude behaviour, abusive language, absconding from service, negligence, physical assaults, gheraos, instigation, unauthorized absence, not joining the transferred place, etc. The methodology for terminating a workman-level employee or someone in the government sector involves a full-fledged inquiry, akin to rocket science. It includes issuing a chargesheet, seeking a reply, conducting an investigation that includes calling for oral or documentary evidence, and submitting a report by the inquiry officer. Based on this report, the disciplinary authority issues a show-cause notice. Once again, an opportunity to reply to the notice is given to the employee. If the response is unsatisfactory, penalties are imposed, taking into consideration various extenuating and aggravating circumstances, past records, length of service, and reasons for misconduct. All of this consumes a substantial amount of time.

A relook at these systems is advisable. They can be tailored according to the size of the entity, the functions it carries out, and its nature, whether private or public. One size does not fit all. A well-defined law with respect to disciplinary actions, which is time-bound, would significantly improve employee performance. Additionally, systems need to be made transparent. For example, public complaints should be published on the website with stipulated time frames for resolutions, reasons given for pending cases, and action taken against the concerned official in case of continuous non-resolution. It is not enough to simply establish rules; their implementation must also be ensured. Memos, warnings, and minor penalties should be imposed in case of irregularities, while major penalties should be imposed in case of grave misconduct.

In fact, the government is also empowered to prematurely retire government servants who are dead wood, as also in public interest, by invoking provisions of service rules such as Fundamental Rule 56 (j). Such actions serve as good deterrents for others. To promote a congenial atmosphere and healthy working environment, there can also be grievance committees and ombudsman policies in place. These measures help prevent the emergence of disputes.

In addition to weak systems, the backdoor entry of non-performers without merit is also a key loophole in our system. Just like multinational companies owe their growth to meritorious employees, government functionaries and other establishments should also have the best human resources in service. In fact, this is one of the pros and potential reasons for privatization.

Most importantly, it should not be only the top officials who are pointed to or questioned each time. The individuals responsible for the particular job and the personnel supervising them should also be held accountable. The aim is to establish procedures that make people at every level conscious of their duties.

We have come a long way, and our administrative systems have shown substantial improvements. Time-bound actions, with reasonable provisions for condonation of delay, website-based compliances, strong and regular supervision by superior officials, transparency, and accountability to the public regarding the measures taken, coupled with the involvement of meritorious individuals in the system, can help us achieve even more.

The writer is a practising Advocate in Supreme Court and High Court of Delhi. Views expressed are personal