The government is well on the way of bringing the sting back in the whiplash for corrupt babus. It is planning to drop the provision of compulsory retirement from the list of penalties awarded to errant civil servants on the grounds that it serves more as a shield than actual punishment. This will leave  demotion, removal or dismissal from service as penalty options of a more consequential degree.

The personnel and training department of the government has formed a three-member panel which will suggest measures to expedite disciplinary proceddings against civil servants. In a note to the panel, the DoPT has said that the compulsory-retirement penalty fails as a deterrrent as those penalised thus continue to receive all retirement benefits. It has also said that it does not serve as a punishment for a major misconduct - rather, it amounts to sending home a disgraced civil servant almost in an honourable way even while a major punishment is intended.

Noting that compulsory retirement does not actually work as a deterrent, the DoPT says, "In this way, such government servants may feel a sense of comfort and security even while indulging in wrong doings with mala fide intention because they know that even if they are compulsorily retired from service, they would get full pension benefits."

Instead,it contends, demotion or removal or dismissal from service would send a clear message to all government servants regarding the severe consequence of their wrong doings with deliberate intention. Compulsory retirement should be limited to axe the inefficient employees as already provided under the rules, the DoPT adds in the note.

On the issue of the four types of punishments presently prescribed as minor penalties, namely censure, withholding promotion, recovery from pay of whole or part of pecuniary loss caused to the government by negligence or breach of orders and withholding of increment up to maximum five years, the department wants only one punishment: Withholding of increment as it serves the purpose of causing pecuniary loss to the charged officer as a punishment.

It says increments can be withheld for more than one year as harsher penalty for the wrongs done by the staff, but it should be for not more than three years. It also seeks deletion of a provision for withholding increments with cumulative effect.

The note also contains a series of proposals for expediting the departmental inquiries on the basis of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission's recommendation to reduce the time frame for disciplinary proceedings to one year. At present there is no time limit for completing such proceedings, though the department has a 14-month time frame while the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) manual has a realistic time frame of two years.

The department has put up the detailed background note on the disciplinary proceedings and inquiries on its website inviting suggestions and comments by June 5 for consideration by the 3-member expert committee comprising of former UPSC chairman P C Hota, former CVC P Shankar and former Personnel Secretary A N Varma.