Centre serves show cause notice on former Bengal Chief Secretary under DM Act

Hours earlier than he retired, former Chief Secretary of West Bengal Alapan Bandyopadhyay was served a show cause notice by the Union Home Ministry under Section 51 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005, punishable by an imprisonment of as much as two years or a wonderful or each.

The part pertains to “punishment for obstruction” for refusal to adjust to a course given by the Central authorities.

Mr. Bandyopadhyay has been requested to “explain in writing” to the Home Ministry inside three days as to “why action should not be taken against him” under Section 51 of the DM Act.

The notice was served barely a few hours earlier than he retired on May 31. He had refused a three-month extension sanctioned to him by the State and Central authorities.

On May 31, the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) additionally shot off a letter asking him to adjust to its May 28 order to report back to the Central authorities’s workplace in Delhi.

Why the DM Act, 2005?

The DM Act, 2005, first got here into existence after the 2004 tsunami, when hundreds had been killed. It was invoked for the primary time within the nation within the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic final 12 months. On March 24, 2020, the Centre, by way of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) headed by the Prime Minister, invoked the provisions of the Act to streamline the administration of the pandemic, empowering District Magistrates to take choices and centralise different choices on provide of oxygen and motion of automobiles.

The Union Home Secretary is the chairman of the nationwide govt committee under the NDMA. The Act continues to be in place and has been prolonged throughout the nation until June 30.

Though the DoPT is the cadre-controlling authority of Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers, the show cause notice was served under provisions of the DM Act, which is under the purview of the Home Ministry.

The notice mentioned that for the reason that Prime Minister is head of the NDMA and had gone to West Bengal to evaluation Cyclone Yaas, the officer’s act of “abstaining himself” from the assembly amounted to violation of the Act.

What does the notice say?

The notice mentioned that the officer, by abstaining himself from the evaluation assembly taken by Prime Minister Narendra Modi at cyclone-affected Kalaikunda in West Bengal on May 28, “has acted in a manner tantamount to refusing to comply with lawful directions of the Central Government and is thus violative of Section 51 (b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.”

The notice said that after the Prime Minister arrived at Kalaikunda for a scheduled evaluation assembly with the Chief Minister and Chief Secretary of West Bengal, the “Prime Minister and other members of his entourage waited for nearly 15 minutes for the officers of the State Government to arrive.”

“In view of the absence, the Chief Secretary was called by an official as to whether they wanted to participate in the review meeting or not. Thereafter, the Chief Secretary arrived, along with the Chief Minister, inside the meeting room and left thereafter immediately,” the notice mentioned.

What is Section 51 (b) of DM Act?

The part prescribes “punishment for obstruction” for refusal to adjust to any course given by or on behalf of the Central authorities or the State authorities or the National Executive Committee or the State Executive Committee or the District Authority under the Act.

It says that violation shall be punishable with imprisonment for a time period which will prolong to at least one 12 months or with a wonderful or each upon conviction. It provides that if “such refusal to comply with directions results in loss of lives or imminent danger thereof, shall on conviction be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years.”

Can the Centre provoke motion in opposition to the officer under Section 51 of the DM Act?

According to Meeran Chadha Borwankar, former Director General of Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D), Section 51 of the Act has two vital caveats.

“Under the Act, the action on the part of the person has to be ‘without reasonable cause’ and ‘failure of an officer to perform the duty without due permission or lawful excuse.’ I am sure the Chief Secretary had ‘reasonable cause’ and ‘lawful excuse’ for not attending the meeting. He can highlight both in his reply,” the retired Indian Police Service (IPS) officer mentioned.

“It will be in the interest of the nation to concentrate on fighting Covid instead of wasting time and energy in Centre versus State at this crucial junction. The Centre should show dignified maturity in closing the case. Having worked in the government for 37 years, I can say with certainty that the Chief Secretary had no intention to disobey the Centre or show disrespect to the Prime Minister,” Ms. Borwankar added.

Were the mentioned provisions used earlier?

Through the actual provision, the Home Ministry made spitting in public a punishable offence in April final 12 months. The pointers issued by the ministry under the DM Act, that are binding on States, additionally made “wearing of face masks in public places mandatory.”

On March 30, 2020, when hundreds of migrants gathered at Anand Vihar railway station in Delhi because of the sudden announcement of the countrywide lockdown, two Delhi authorities officers had been suspended and two others had been served show cause notice by the Centre under the Act for dereliction of responsibility.

Three of them had been senior IAS officers and the fourth is from Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands Service (DANICS).

The National Executive Committee chaired by Union Home Secretary Ajay Bhalla discovered that the “officers, who were responsible to ensure strict compliance” to the directions issued by Committee concerning containment of unfold of COVID-19, “have prima facie failed to do so.”