ये लीजिए…. मोदी सरकार की एक और पलटी. दरअसल, पलटी तो महाराष्ट्र की देवेंद्र फडणवीस सरकार ने मारी है, लेकिन अगर तकनीकी तौर पर मुखिया यानी मुख्यमंत्री को साइड कर दें तो सरकार एक तरह से मोदी की ही है और उन्हीं के नाम पर चुन कर आई है. उन्हीं का चेहरा देखकर राज्य के लोगों ने भाजपा को वोट दिया था. इसलिए इस पलटी को मोदी की पलटी कहना गलत नहीं होगा. मोदी ने लोकसभा चुनाव प्रचार के दौरान चीख-चीख कर कहा था कि उनकी सरकार आई, तो भ्रष्टाचार की गुमनाम शिकायतों पर भी कार्रवाई की जाएगी.
सरकार की कार्यप्रणाली बदलने को लेकर मोदी का यह वादा सिर्फ केंद्र सरकार के लिए ही नहीं, बल्कि राज्य सरकारों के भी था. लेकिन अब मोदी की गोदी में बैठकर महाराष्ट्र की सरकार चला रहे फडणवीस ने नया फरमान जारी कर काले कारनामों को उजागर करनेवालों को मंसूबों पर ढक्कन लगा दिया है. पढ़िए इंडियन एक्सप्रेस में प्रकाशित खबर….
Maharashtra govt won’t probe anonymous graft complaints
Express News Service | Mumbai |
In a severe blow to whistleblowers in Maharashtra, the BJP-led state government has made it clear that anonymous complaints, irrespective of how serious allegations are levelled in them, won’t be probed. The General Administration Department, headed by Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, has issued directives to all state departments stating that complaints not carrying the name and the address of the complainant must be closed without any action. It further states that the same rule should be followed in complaints that carry the name of the complainant, but the allegations levelled in them are “vague” in nature.
Even in cases where the complainant chooses to identify himself/herself and the allegations are “verifiable”, the approval of the competent authority should be taken for taking cognisance of such a complaint. After which, it must first be referred back to the complainant to ascertain if he/she owns up to filing the complaint. If nothing is heard from the complainant within a month, such complaints must be treated as “pseudonymous” in nature and discarded without any probe, the directive adds.
Sources in the government said the move was to arrest policy paralysis in the bureaucracy. But anti-corruption activists said that it would discourage people from becoming whistleblowers and exposing corruption. The government, on the other hand, has argued that whistleblowers who desire to protect their identity were already protected under the Public Interest Disclosure and Protection of Informers Resolution, 2004, where the identify of a complainant is kept a secret.
