- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by Anonymous.
21/12/2010 at 4:13 AM #403AnonymousGuest
Disadvantage, male govt servants
Tribune News Service
Shimla, December 20
If a male government servant neglects his wife and family, he is liable for punitive action under the Central Civic Services Conduct Rules, applicable to the employees of the Centre and the state government, but the rules are silent in case of female government servant.
This interesting fact has come to light from the information obtained under the Right to Information Act (RTI) by Devashish Bhattacharya, an RTI activist, while pursuing a complaint of a husband, whose wife, an employee in the Union Ministry of Corporate Affairs, left the family following a dispute.
As the ministry did not take any action on his complaint, he obtained the file notings pertaining to the case under the RTI to know the reasons for it.
The copies of the file notings supplied by central public information officer J.C.Gupta read: “The instruction for proper maintenance of family states that in case a government servant is reported to have acted in a manner unbecoming of a government servant, for instance, by way of neglecting his wife and family, departmental action can be taken against him on that score. Penalties that may, for good and sufficient reasons, can be imposed on an errant government servant. Further, it has been held that neglect of wife and family in a manner unbecoming of a government servant may be regarded as a good and sufficient reason to justify action being taken against him under this rule”.From the instruction, the noting says, it is observed that the rule is for male government servants, who neglect their wives and family, whereas, there is no provision of rule for taking action against a female government servant for neglecting their families
Bhattacharya said it was time to review the skewed rule to end the gender bias and ensure justice to husbands who are neglected by their spouses.
In his complaint, the husband had stated that his 76-year-old mother, who was a heart patient, was not in a position to avail the medical treatment facility as his wife after an altercation, had taken away both CGHS cards. He had sought the intervention of the department in the matter to get the cards returned failing which the department would be bound to hold her responsible and accountable by taking action against her.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.