The political parties were found wearing dirty linen in the standing committee of the civic body as they tried to shield an officer caught accepting bribe by the anti-corruption bureau.
Taking political parties at face value has always been foolhardy and a striking instance came to the fore when the Shiv Sena and Bhartiya Janta Party, which have taken the Congress-led central government to the cleaners with their support for social activist Anna Hazare’s anti-graft campaign, were found wearing dirty linen in the standing committee of the civic body as they tried to shield an officer caught accepting bribe by the anti-corruption bureau (ACB).
The officer, Rashida Rehman, was acquitted of the charge by the court, but was found guilty in a departmental inquiry, following which the commissioner had recommended her dismissal. The saffron-ruled standing committee, however, rejected the commissioner’s recommendation stating that the grounds on which Rehman was found guilty have been quashed by the court.
Rehman is employed as a deputy legal officer in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC). She was trapped by the ACB in 2004 and suspended from service in January that year.
In late 2002, the kin of a BMC officer Jenny Fernandes, who wanted to get her dues cleared after her death, approached the legal department of the civic body for advice. The proposal had been forwarded to one Nagorao Shankarrao Vaidya, who was a junior law officer and was working under Rehman. Despite the matter not being under her jurisdiction, Rehman took up the case.
Thereafter, she demanded Rs1 lakh from Fernandez’s brother to expedite the settlement of Rs3.5 lakh dues.
Fernandez’s brother complained to the ACB and Rehman was caught red-handed while accepting the bribe. In due course, however, she and Vaidya were acquitted by the court, but a departmental inquiry was initiated against both.
The inquiry found that Rehman had purposely kept the mater pending with her for more than 14 months, and there were no justified reasons for doing so. The inquiry committee also stated that both the officers had not shown integrity towards the BMC, and that it was an indecent act. It found that the charges against them had been proved, and hence the panel recommended their dismissal under section 83(1) of the BMC Act, 1888.
However, when the civic commissioner sent the proposal for final approval to the standing committee, the corporators rejected it and called for the reinstatement of the officers.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}