Grievance Redressal Mechanism | Public Administration Optional for UPSC (Notes) PDF Download

Introduction

In today's society, the State plays a crucial role in socioeconomic development. The effectiveness of government machinery is vital for the success of democracy and development. However, the exercise of administrative powers can sometimes lead to malpractices, resulting in public grievances against the administration. According to Chambers Dictionary, a grievance is a "ground of complaint, a condition felt to be oppressive or wrongful." In a democratic setup, it is essential for people to have the opportunity to express their grievances and for there to be a system in place for addressing them. This unit will discuss the nature of public grievances and the institutional arrangements for their redressal.

Public Grievances

• The colonial past and the authoritarian nature of Indian administration have led to a negative perception of the administration among citizens. Furthermore, the disparity between administrative performance and public expectations has contributed to this unfavorable image. The democratic aspirations of the populace often clash with the authoritarian approach of the administrators, creating tension. Additionally, the contradictions within the social context have resulted in inequalities, with noticeable discrimination in how citizens are treated by the administration.
• The social divide between civil servants and the citizens they serve exacerbates this issue. For instance, a well-educated urban middle-class civil servant is expected to cater to the needs of poor and illiterate rural citizens, creating a socio-psychological gap. Chronic delays in service delivery, coupled with numerous complex rules and regulations that are difficult for ordinary citizens to understand, further compound the problem. The cumulative impact of these factors leads to a significant buildup of public grievances against the administration.

Some of the common grievances against the administration include:

• Corruption: Demanding and accepting bribes for performing or not performing tasks.
• Favouritism: Performing or neglecting tasks to please influential individuals.
• Nepotism: Assisting relatives or friends preferentially.
• Discourtesy: Using abusive language or behaving disrespectfully.
• Neglect of Duty: Failing to carry out legally mandated tasks.
• Discrimination: Overlooking legitimate complaints from poor and powerless citizens.
• Delay: Failing to complete tasks in a timely manner.
• Maladministration: Inefficiency in meeting objectives.
• Inadequate Redressal Machinery: Neglecting public complaints against the administration.

In addition to these common grievances, there may be specific complaints related to particular administrative departments or agencies. For instance, grievances against the police often involve allegations of third-degree methods such as beating, torture, wrongful confinement, or harassment of suspects and witnesses. Other areas of concern include the fabrication of evidence and collusion between the police and criminal elements.

Grievances against agricultural administration typically focus on the quality and quantity of inputs and services provided to farmers. While there may be various specific complaints against individual administrative agencies, corruption remains the most prevalent issue. The subsequent sections will delve into public grievances related to corruption and the mechanisms available for addressing them.

Corruption in Administration

Modes of Corruption:
Corruption can be understood in various ways. Generally, it is not solely about monetary gains; rather, it involves the misuse of public office for personal gain, violating established rules and regulations. According to Shri Santhanam, Chairperson of the Committee on Prevention of Corruption, any action or inaction by a government servant in the course of their duty for personal advantage constitutes corruption.

The Central Vigilance Commission has outlined several modes of corruption, which include:

1. Acceptance of substandard goods or services.
2. Misappropriation of public funds and resources.
3. Borrowing money from contractors or firms with whom the officer has official dealings.
4. Showing favoritism to certain contractors or firms.
5. Accumulating assets disproportionate to known sources of income.
6. Purchasing immovable property without obtaining prior permission or notifying the relevant authorities.
7. Causing losses to the government through negligence or other means.
8. Abusing official position or powers.
9. Producing forged documents, such as certificates of age, birth, or community.
10. Engaging in irregularities related to seat reservations for rail and air travel.
11. Committing irregularities in the granting of import and export licenses.
12. Exhibiting moral turpitude.
13. Accepting gifts in violation of regulations.

Institutions for Dealing with Corruption

Central Vigilance Commission (CVC)

In the aftermath of India's independence, various measures were initiated to curb corruption in public services. In 1962, the Central Government established a Committee on Prevention of Corruption, led by Shri. K. Santhanam, to evaluate existing anti-corruption measures and suggest improvements. The Santhanam Committee, in 1964, recommended the formation of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) to enhance the effectiveness of anti-corruption efforts.

The CVC was thus constituted in 1964, with an advisory role under the Ministry of Personnel. Its jurisdiction covers:

• All employees of the Central government.
• Employees of public undertakings, corporate bodies, and institutions under the Central Government.
• Employees of the Delhi Metropolitan Council and the New Delhi Municipal Corporation.

The CVC receives complaints about corruption and malpractices from citizens and gathers information from various sources, including press reports and audit findings.

Appointment and Removal of the Central Vigilance Commissioner:

• The Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) is appointed by the President of India for a term of six years or until the age of 65, whichever comes first.
• The CVC can be removed in a manner similar to the removal of the Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).
• Once the term is completed, the CVC is not eligible for any further employment under the Central or State government.

Functions of the CVC:

• Inquiry into Corruption Cases: The CVC conducts inquiries into transactions involving public servants suspected of acting improperly or corruptly. It advises disciplinary authorities at various stages of investigation, appeal, and review.
• Supervision of Vigilance Work: The CVC oversees vigilance and anti-corruption efforts in ministries, departments, and autonomous bodies of the Government of India.
• Advisory Role: The Commission advises administrative authorities to modify procedures and practices that may facilitate corruption and misconduct.
• Appointment of Chief Vigilance Officers (CVOs): The CVC approves the appointment of CVOs who lead vigilance units in different organizations.
• Review of Administrative Practices: The CVC may initiate reviews of administrative procedures to ensure integrity and reduce opportunities for corruption.

Vigilance Machinery in States and Districts

• The vigilance machinery at the state level varies from one state to another. Most states have a State Vigilance Commission and a special police establishment to handle corruption cases within the state government and public undertakings. The State Vigilance Commission presents an annual report to the state government, which is then submitted to the State Legislature.
• At the district level, a District Vigilance Officer is appointed by the District Collector from among the gazetted officers. This officer is responsible for overseeing vigilance activities in the district.

Lokpal:

The Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC), established in 1966, prioritized the resolution of public grievances and recommended the creation of an Ombudsman-type institution known as the Lokpal and Lokayukta. The Lokpal is a central-level institution, while the Lokayukta operates at the state level.The concept of the Ombudsman originated in Sweden in 1809 and is based on the principle of administrative accountability to parliament. The Ombudsman is responsible for handling complaints against administrative and judicial actions. The features proposed by the ARC for the Lokpal and Lokayukta include:

• Independence and impartiality
• Private and uniform investigations
• Non-political appointments
• Status comparable to the highest judicial functionary
• Dealing with matters involving injustice, corruption, and favoritism
• Protection from judicial interference
• Maximum latitude and powers in obtaining relevant information
• Independence from executive government benefits

Despite several attempts since 1968 to establish the Lokpal at the central level, including bills introduced in Parliament in various years, the Lokpal has not been successfully implemented.

Lokayukta:

• The Lokayukta is the Ombudsman institution established at the state level in India. Many state governments have set up the offices of Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta to address complaints against administrative actions. Some states with Lokayukta offices include Maharashtra, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Assam, Gujarat, Punjab, Delhi, and Haryana.
• The Governor, who is the executive head of the state, appoints the Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta. The appointment process involves consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court and the leader of the opposition in the legislative assembly. The term of office for Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta is typically five years, with some states imposing an upper age limit for candidates. The status of Lokayukta is equivalent to that of the Chief Justice of a High Court or a Supreme Court judge, while the Up-Lokayukta's status is similar to that of a High Court judge or an additional secretary to the Government of India.
• To ensure independence and impartiality, Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta are prohibited from being members of parliament or state legislatures, and they cannot have any political party affiliations. After leaving office, they are ineligible for any position under the state government. Additionally, reappointment of Lokayukta is expressly prohibited. Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta have the authority to investigate actions taken by ministers, secretaries, and other public servants, subjecting all administrative actions to scrutiny. Certain officials, such as the Chairperson of Zila Parishad and other local bodies, are also included within the Lokayukta's purview.
• When conducting investigations, Lokayukta and Up-Lokayukta ensure the proceedings are conducted in private, and the identities of the complainants or those complained against are kept confidential throughout the investigation process.
• The Seventh All-India Conference of Lokpals, Lok Ayuktas, and Up-Lokayuktas held in Bangalore in January 2003 emphasized the need for a Lok Ayukta Act to establish uniformity and independence from political influence. Recommendations included basing Lok Ayukta appointments on the Chief Justice of India's recommendations, ensuring tenure protection, salary and emoluments security, and a sound removal procedure. The conference also stressed the importance of protecting staff assigned to Lokayukta, making Lokayukta reports binding on government servants, publicizing annual reports, and improving public accessibility to Lokayukta services