Government. initiates new disciplinary action against AB Venkateswara Rao

It calls for an explanation of “derogatory comments” against investigators

The state government has decided to take new disciplinary action against IPS Commissioner AB Venkateswara Rao, who is suspended for misconduct under rule 8 of the All India Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules of 1969.

It instructed Mr. Rao to submit a written defense statement within 30 days of the decision being received, including whether he would like to be heard in person to provide an explanation of the “derogatory comments and allegations” he made. investigating the irregularities he allegedly committed in the procurement of aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles for the police department when he was the additional DGP (secret service).

According to GO Rt No. 767, issued by General Secretary Aditya Nath Das on Sunday, an investigation will only be conducted into those articles of the indictment that are not permitted if deemed necessary.

Mr. Rao must admit or deny any of these charges. Action will be taken against him based on the material available in the files as he will have no explanation to offer if Mr Rao does not make a written statement of defense or does not appear in person before the competent authority or the provisions of rule 8 of the All in the specified time Failure to comply with or reject India Services (Discipline & Appeal) rules of 1969 or the orders or instructions made under this rule.

The rule

Mr. Rao was made aware of rule 18 of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules of 1968, which states that no member of the service should exert or seek political or external influence over any higher authority to promote interests in relation to the matter with his / her service under the government.

If representation is received on his behalf from another person in relation to a matter dealt with in these proceedings, it will be assumed that Mr Rao is aware of such representation and that it has occurred in his case and action will be taken against him for breach against rule 18, it was said.

Leave a Comment