Author: OpIndia Staff
Publication: Opindia.com
Date: September 1, 2019
URL:      https://www.opindia.com/2019/09/exclusive-read-the-detailed-charges-of-misconduct-against-ias-officer-who-resigned-over-restrictions-in-kashmir/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

IAS officer Kannan Gopinathan is in the news after he resigned from his post protesting the government’s decision to impose restriction in Jammu and Kashmir. While he has refused to join duty after the central government rejected his resignation and asked to join immediately, now it has come to light that the officer was facing disciplinary action even before the decision to abrogate Articles 370 and 35A in Jammu and Kashmir were taken.

Kannan Gopinathan, who was the Secretary at the power department of the Union Territories of Daman & Diu, and Dadra & Nagar Haveli, had submitted his resignation on August 21. After resigning, he had issued statements in media saying that “denial of fundamental rights” to lakhs of people in Jammu and Kashmir was one of the reasons of his resignation.

On July 8, almost a month before the decisions on J&K, the government had issued a memorandum proposing disciplinary action against Kannan Gopinathan on several grounds. The memorandum said that the officer had been indulging in various acts of omission and commission which constitute misconduct within the meaning of rule (3) of the AIS (conduct) Rules, 1968. It said that he has indulged in act of insubordination, adoption of dilatory tactics and dereliction of duty etc.

The document lists five offences committed by Gopinathan, which are:

1. Delay of nine months in submitting a file to amend the policy regarding discontinuation of issue of Permanent Residence Certificate.

2. Delay in work of underground electrical cabling and shifting of electric poles, to enable execution of beautification of roads.

3. Bypassing the prescribed reporting channel on three different instances.

4. Failing to submit report after his visit to Kerala during floods

5. Not submitting nominations for prime Ministers Award under various categories.

The memorandum had asked Kannan Gopinathan to reply within 10 days why disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated against for the stated acts.
............................................................................................
F. No. 14033/02/2019.UTS-I
Government of India
Ministry of Home Affairs

North Block, New Delhi,
Dated 8th July, 2019.

MEMORANDUM

Subject: Proposal for appropriate disciplinary action from the UT of Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli — case of Shri Kannan Gopinathan, IAS (AGMUT:2012).

Whereas, the UT Administration of Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli has brought to the notice of Ministry of Home Affairs that Shri Kannan Gopinathan, IAS has been indulging in various acts of omission and commission which constitute misconduct within the meaning of rule (3) of the AIS (Conduct) Rules, 1968. The UT Administration has, inter-alia, informed the Ministry of Home Affairs, vide their letter no. 6/117/2019-PER/478 dated 11.06.2019, that Shri Kannan Gopinathan, IAS has been indulging in act of insubordination, adoption of dilatory tactics and dereliction of duty etc. It includes the following events :-

(a) That a delay of nine months was observed on part of Sh. Kannan Gopinathan in submitting a file to amend the policy regarding discontinuation of issue of Permanent Residence Certificate.

(b) That Shri Kannan Gopinathan was asked to get the work of underground electrical cabling and shifting of electric poles completed by May, 2018 to enable early execution of projects of beautification of Roads from Naroli to Saheed Chowk and from Saheed Chowk to Samarwani. However, the poles could not be shifted till March, 2019.

(c) That Shri Kannan Gopinathan bypassed the prescribed reporting channel. Three such instances dated 26/06/2018, 16/07/2018 and 15/10/2018 for appointment of Director on the Board of DNH Power Distribution Company Limited had come to notice. He had submitted files directly to the Hon'ble Administrator without routing them through the Advisor to the Administrator,

(d) That Shri Kannan Gopinathan visited Kerala in the wake of massive flood in the State to meet the officers concerned and chalk out a plan as to how the UT Administration can help the flood victims. He failed to submit any report on his return from tour.

(e) That Shri Kannan Gopinathan was asked to prepare the nominations for Prime Ministers Award under various categories for innovations in public administration. However, he failed to comply with the said directions.

2. Whereas, Shri Kannan Gopinathan, IAS is holding a responsible position in the Government and therefore, knowledge of extant rules and instructions including that of All India Service (Conduct) Rules, 1968 can be safely attributed to him.

3. And now therefore, Shri Kannan Gopinathan, IAS is directed to Show Cause within 10 days from the date of receipt of this Memorandum as to why disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated against him for the aforesaid acts of omission and commission. He is advised to submit his reply through the Advisor to the Administrator, Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli. The Advisor to the Administrator is requested to examine the reply/clarification of Shri Kannan Gopinathan, IAS within 15 days thereafter and submit the recommendations of the UT Administration, with the approval of the Administrator, to the MHA within the same period. This issues with the approval of the Competent Authority.

(Rakesh Kumar Singh)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Ph No. 011-23092688
 
To
Sh. Kannan Gopinathan, IAS (AGMUT: 2012)
(Through the Advisor to the Administrator, DD&DNH — with the request to serve the original copy of this Memorandum to the officer and forward his ink-signed acknowledgement to this Ministry for records.)

Copy to: The Advisor to Administrator. DD & DNH, Moti, Daman-396220 - for information please.
............................................................................................

Kannan had submitted his reply to the notice on 31st July, where he had denied some charges, and gave justifications for others. He had said that as he was busy in election duty, some of his works were delayed. He denied the charge that he didn’t nominate anyone for PM’s award, asserting that 5 applications were submitted, but none of them was selected for any award. For delay in electrical work, he cited the delay in getting approvals from various departments. Regarding his Kerala visit, he said that it was decided in a meeting with the DC that the report need not be submitted.