Prayagraj: Observing that ‘unbridled’ and ‘unchecked’ discretion in civil services undermines the rule of law and legal certainty, and weakens accountability, the Allahabad high court has referred the ‘conduct’ of an IAS officer — UP’s ACS, home — to the department of personnel and training (DoPT).Hearing a habeas corpus petition on Wed, Justice Vinod Diwakar said that the officer made a deliberate and calculated attempt to undermine the authority of the court, referring him to the DoPT for assessment of his suitability for future assignments by the appointment committee of the cabinet (ACC).The observations came while hearing of the petition filed by Megha Raikwar of Jhansi seeking directions to recover her 15-year-old daughter from the alleged illegal custody of a private respondent.The court was informed that an FIR had been lodged and the police later filed a charge-sheet, which the petitioner alleged was based primarily on statements of the accused and did not array the “real” accused.At an earlier hearing, the high court found the charge-sheet was not in conformity with directions laid down in Subhash Chandra & Others v. State of UP, where exhaustive guidelines were issued to ensure criminal investigations are fair, scientific and legally sustainable.In an affidavit filed on Feb 20, the home department stated that the state proposed to challenge the Subhash Chandra judgment before the Supreme Court and requested the High Court to refrain from passing further orders on implementation or enforcement of those directions until the proposed special leave petition (SLP) was decided.The court deferred the matter and awaited information on the SLP’s status. However, despite more than three months passing since Feb and more than a year since the Subhash Chandra judgment, no SLP was filed.The bench observed that the proposed SLP was relied upon by the ACS, home, as a justification to postpone scrutiny of continued non-compliance, rather than as a bona fide effort to obtain an authoritative determination from the Supreme Court at the earliest.It said superior officers must be held accountable for the conduct and performance of subordinates and noted such responsibility could extend to criminal liability where failures enable corruption, fraud, willful suppression, contempt of govt orders and non-implementation of state policy and programmes.The high court recommended that the DoPT evolve a doctrine of “superior responsibility” to hold senior officers criminally accountable for failure to prevent or punish misconduct by subordinates.By its June 3 order, the court disposed of the petition after the minor girl was recovered by local police and restored to her parents.
