Puja Khedkar, an IAS probationer from Pune, recently made headlines for allegedly falsifying OBC and disability certificates to gain entry into the Indian Administrative Service (IAS). Following a report submitted by the Pune District Collector and multiple allegations against her, she has now been pulled from training and recalled to the academy.
The Maharashtra government, the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration (LBSNAA), and a single-member committee from the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) have launched investigation into her credentials.
Senior sources in the government say Khedkar is likely to be terminated for forgery and falsification of ‘entry level documents’. But why has the government launched multiple inquiries at several levels against an IAS probationer? Why can’t it terminate her service?
Senior bureaucrats say the government is doing “the right thing” because it is legally bound by a set of administrative rules that are uniform for all candidates.
Despite all the clamour, the government must conduct thorough inquiries before taking such an action, adhering to strict administrative rules that ensure fairness for all candidates. Senior bureaucrats highlight that these investigations are crucial not only for the due process but also to pinpoint and rectify any systemic vulnerabilities.
The government needs to identify and address the ‘point of breach’ into the system and take actions, penalise the responsible persons, they added.
Why are Inquiries Essential?
News18 spoke with retired and service IAS officers to understand the need for the elaborate exercise, the inquiries ordered by the state and central government into Puja’s case, despite the fact that she is not even an IAS officer yet, but a probationer.
Sanjeev Chopra, former director of LBSNAA and a retired IAS officer said, “There is a set of rules that govern the All India Service (AIS) officers and there are rules that are meant for the probationers or trainees. An IAS probationer is a trainee under observation. It is the most crucial time for them and they cannot afford to show signs which may lead to unbecoming of an IAS.”
“Their services are not confirmed until they pass their period of probation complying with the rules and maintaining integrity. They do not have the rights of the IAS officers. About the allegations of falsifying documents, it is a call of UPSC and DoPT. Director of the training academy may take action based on the reports,” he added.
Reacting to multiple allegations against several serving officers coming to the fore following Puja Khedkar case, Chopra said, “The system has been breached at some point. The government has to identify the point of breach through inquiry. The officers, who faked documents to get entry to this service, can be pulled up, penalised in accordance with the law. Forgery is a criminal offence under Indian laws. It does not matter when they committed the crime, now or 10 years back. If the offence is proved, they might be punished by the law.”
What Does the ‘Probation’ Rule Say?
The probationers are governed by the Indian Administrative Service (Probation) Rules, 1954. The Central government keeps adding instructions or amending some sections depending on the requirements.
In October, 2022, the DoPT, in an office-memorandum, issued a set of instructions related to the confirmation of service for a probationer.
In the memorandum, accessed by News 18, the DoPT listed several instructions to streamline the process of confirming Direct Recruit officers of the IAS.
The instructions covered various aspects relating to probation. “A probationer who is found not to possess the basic qualities of character and ability essential in a member of the Indian Administrative Service should be discharged early from the service. There is little to be gained by continuing such a probationer in service for long. It would also not be fair to the probationer,” the order said.
The rules and instructions issued by the DoPT clearly define the modalities of confirming the service of a probationer or extending the period of probation.
In case of discharging a probationer of service or terminating his or her tenure, the DoPT said, “A probationer, who is not making satisfactory progress or who shows himself or herself to be inadequate for the service, in any way, should be informed of his shortcomings well before the expiry of the original probationary period so that he can make special efforts at self-improvement.”
“This can be done by giving him or her a written warning to the effect that his general performance has not been such as to justify his confirmation in the Service and that, unless he showed substantial improvement within a specified period, the question of discharging him or her from the service would have to be considered. Even though this is not required by the rules, discharge from the service being a severe, final and irrevocable step, the probationer should be given such an opportunity before taking the drastic step of discharge,” the DoPT added.
