Overstaying in a government house now can land a government official in jail! Punjab has made it a non-bailable offence for government officers in the state to retain their official houses after their transfer or retirement.
Amending the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for Punjab, the government has declared unauthorised occupation of government premises will be treated “criminal trespass” and included in Section 441, IPC.
Amending the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the government has further made this trespass a non-bailable offence. The offence remains bailable except for government servants who continue to occupy government houses. Such officers might have to spend time in jail for the offence.
The Punjab Vidhan Sabha had cleared a Bill to this affect in its last session and the government now notified both these amendments.
Probably the first person to benefit from the amendments will be Director-General of Police N.P.S. Aulakh who is awaiting possession of the official residence earmarked for him in Sector 5 here.
Sources said an IAS officer of Haryana who retired last year is still occupying the house which was to be given to the Punjab DGP.
These amendments to the IPC and CrPC are a result of directions issued by the Supreme Court which had directed all state governments “to consider the desirability of taking steps to amend Section 441, IPC, to include the unauthorised occupation of a government house by a government servant.”
The apex court had pointed out that Uttar Pradesh and Orissa had already amended the IPC to this effect. The Supreme Court further stated that the states should consider amending the first schedule of the CrPC to make criminal trespass non-bailable in so far as it relates to the continuance of government servants in government premises.
The court had also asked the various states to send a status report on the extent of such “unauthorised occupancy” and how many officers had been penalised in this regard. Following these directions, the Chandigarh Administration gathered lakhs from Punjab and Haryana officers who were illegally occupying the houses provided by the UT to Punjab and Haryana pool.
Sources in Haryana said a similar amendment had not been made in the state.
The Punjab government allows a government servant to hold on to his official residence for two months after he has been shifted out. The officer continues to pay the same rent. However, the officer can continue to stay on payment of double the rent for another four months after which he has to vacate house.
However, many officials continue to occupy the house during which they are charged market rent for the house as penalty. A former deputy commissioner of SAS Nagar had not vacated the house even after having been transferred more than six months ago. A case of penalising the officer and asking him to vacate the house has been sent to Punjab chief secretary Ramesh Inder Singh.
Source:- The Tribune 30 November 2008
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20081130/nation.htm#11
Amending the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for Punjab, the government has declared unauthorised occupation of government premises will be treated “criminal trespass” and included in Section 441, IPC.
Amending the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the government has further made this trespass a non-bailable offence. The offence remains bailable except for government servants who continue to occupy government houses. Such officers might have to spend time in jail for the offence.
The Punjab Vidhan Sabha had cleared a Bill to this affect in its last session and the government now notified both these amendments.
Probably the first person to benefit from the amendments will be Director-General of Police N.P.S. Aulakh who is awaiting possession of the official residence earmarked for him in Sector 5 here.
Sources said an IAS officer of Haryana who retired last year is still occupying the house which was to be given to the Punjab DGP.
These amendments to the IPC and CrPC are a result of directions issued by the Supreme Court which had directed all state governments “to consider the desirability of taking steps to amend Section 441, IPC, to include the unauthorised occupation of a government house by a government servant.”
The apex court had pointed out that Uttar Pradesh and Orissa had already amended the IPC to this effect. The Supreme Court further stated that the states should consider amending the first schedule of the CrPC to make criminal trespass non-bailable in so far as it relates to the continuance of government servants in government premises.
The court had also asked the various states to send a status report on the extent of such “unauthorised occupancy” and how many officers had been penalised in this regard. Following these directions, the Chandigarh Administration gathered lakhs from Punjab and Haryana officers who were illegally occupying the houses provided by the UT to Punjab and Haryana pool.
Sources in Haryana said a similar amendment had not been made in the state.
The Punjab government allows a government servant to hold on to his official residence for two months after he has been shifted out. The officer continues to pay the same rent. However, the officer can continue to stay on payment of double the rent for another four months after which he has to vacate house.
However, many officials continue to occupy the house during which they are charged market rent for the house as penalty. A former deputy commissioner of SAS Nagar had not vacated the house even after having been transferred more than six months ago. A case of penalising the officer and asking him to vacate the house has been sent to Punjab chief secretary Ramesh Inder Singh.
Source:- The Tribune 30 November 2008
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2008/20081130/nation.htm#11
No comments:
Post a Comment