When GAD attempted to engage retired
official as ‘parallel Advocate General’
Law
Minister Bukhari snubbed GAD: ‘State can run without Tota Kaul’
Ahmed Ali Fayyaz
_______
JAMMU, Jan
30: Functioning directly under Chief Secretary’s administrative control and
regulating various administrative services, General Administration Department
(GAD) has an inherent tendency to interfere with the working of any department,
including the State government’s corporations, boards and autonomous
organisations. However, its efforts to install a retired official as ‘parallel
Advocate General’ fell flat when the former Law Minister Basharat Bukhari put
his put down and turned down the proposal with contempt.
Feroz Ahmad
Sheikh, who retired in 2013 as Additional Secretary (Law) after serving GAD for
a long period, had been re-engaged as ‘Standing Counsel’ by Omar Abdullah’s
government for two years. Even after the change of regime, followed by
appointment of the new Advocate General (AG) and a team of the government
advocates, GAD in December 2015 moved a proposal of granting yet another
extension of two years to Mr Sheikh.
Terms and
conditions of his engagement with the nomenclature of ‘Standing Counsel’ were
drafted in a way that Mr Sheikh would function like an AG for the GAD
independent of the Law Department. This notwithstanding the fact that the Law
Department had placed two of its young Law Officers, Assistant Legal
Remembrancer Sajad-un-Nabi and Suhail Muzaffar, exclusively at GAD’s disposal.
On the AG’s panel, Deputy AG Ehtisham Hussain Bhat also looked after the GAD
matters. Monthly salary of around Rs 1.50 lakh was also fixed for Mr Sheikh.
Days before
Chief Minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed fell ill in Srinagar and subsequently died
at a hospital in New Delhi on January 7th, GAD submitted the
proposal of Mr Sheikh’s second engagement to Law Department. Even as some GAD
officials played up in the corridors of power that Law Minister Bukhari and the
AG, Jehangir Iqbal Ganai, had appointed a number of their friends and relatives
as Government Advocates and Standing Counsels, Mr Bukhari turned down the
proposal with a warning that GAD should no more overstep Law Department’s
jurisdiction, particularly so in the extension and re-engagement of the
retiring or retired officials.
“It is said
that, in the Maharaja’s rule, a file recommending extension in the services of
a retiring officer of Finance department, namely (Mr) Tota Kaul, was submitted
to (late) Maharaja Hari Singh. The Maharaja returned the file with the
following observation: ‘State can run without Tota Kaul”, Bukhari recorded on
the file accessed by STATE TIMES. He added in his hand-written note: “…we must
allow young officers to grow and prove themselves by taking the mantle of
running the affairs of administration”.
Shooting
down the GAD proposal, Bukhari added: “And also this proposal from GAD to
engage Mr Feroz negates and disapproves the immense talent, acumen and ability
of the serving officers / officials and hence creates doubts about their
competence. Moreover the terms of engagement (vis-à-vis Mr Feroz) mentioned in
note para 257 of this file suggest/ indicate as if we have to engage another
Advocate General. While as GAD’s interests taken care of/ looked after by
learned Advocate General, besides two young law officers stand already posted
with GAD. So need not to engage Mr Feroz as standing counsel after his
retirement as the said officer (retiree) was already engaged for two years
after his superannuation”.
Scolding Mr
Sheikh’s promoters further, Bukhari wrote: “So let GAD move ahead without
retired officers/ officials as someday everyone is to retire. Moreover GAD must
restrain from overstepping Law department’s jurisdiction and even bypassing it
in future”.
END
No comments:
Post a Comment