Indian Express: Chandigarh: Saturday,
April 01, 2017.
THE
INTELLIGENCE Bureau (IB) has called whistleblower IFS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi
as a “diligent officer”. IB’s comments are part of an affidavit filed in the
Delhi High Court on March 6. The Centre had given him an effective “zero” in
his annual appraisal report for 2015-16, the year the officer was conferred the
prestigious Ramon Magsaysay Award for battling corruption. Chaturvedi is
currently posted in Uttarakhand while the appraisal was for his assignment as
deputy secretary at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New
Delhi. It was the period when he had been stripped of his responsibilities and
left “without work”, forcing him to move the Supreme Court.
In its
affidavit, the IB said, “…the Intelligence Bureau has a history of 128 years of
service to the nation and has played a prominent role in the area of National
Security. The reports prepared by Intelligence Bureau are sensitive in nature
and meant for the consumption of the Government.” “…the IB’s reports are secret
in nature and any disclosure of such information will have adverse impact on
National Security. The respondent (Chaturvedi) being a diligent officer from
all India services is also expected to appreciate sensitive nature of the work
being carried out by intelligence agencies,” it added.
The IB had prepared
its report about Chaturvedi when he had sought change of cadre to Uttarakhand
from Haryana a few years back, citing “extreme hardships” during the Congress
rule. Then, the Centre, in August 2014, had sought a report from the IB. The
intelligence agency had sent its report to the Cabinet Secretary. The officer,
on January 18, 2016, had sought a copy of the IB report in connection with his
petition before the Supreme Court, seeking action against Haryana officials.
But, the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) did not supply the
report to Chaturvedi on the basis of IB’s objection.
IB is one of
the organisations specified in the second schedule to the RTI Act under Section
24, exempting it from purview of the RTI Act except when the Central
Information Commission (CIC) considers that the information sought is ether
related to corruption or violation of human rights by that organisation. The
CIC in April 2016 directed IB to supply a copy of the report to the officer but
the agency approached the Delhi High Court. The HC stayed the CIC orders. The
intelligence agency also says that “the respondent (Chaturvedi) did not address
the RTI application to IB at any stage”.
In its April
2016 order, the CIC stated, “The IB, in performance of its duty, established
that the appellant was being harassed for exposing corruption.” It’s sad that
the same department, which recognised and established the fact of harassment of
the appellant, denied that copy to him. “It is not a question of Sanjiv
Chaturvedi or any other but the requirement of protecting thousands of sincere
officers, who are silently protecting the rule of law, to enable and embolden
them by developing systemic safeguards as provided in the Constitution. The
rule of law governed system should stand like a rock by those who fight
corruption,” the CIC added.
.JPG)
.JPG)
