Finding irregularities in the handling of disciplinary proceedings against a Punjabi teacher whose disability certificate came under scrutiny during a Vigilance Bureau inquiry in 2024, the Punjab State Information Commission (PSIC) has directed the chief secretary to examine the role of then director, school education (secondary).
Event Context
The commission has also asked the Vigilance Bureau director to investigate contradictory medical evidence relating to the issuance of the disability certificate and take appropriate action in accordance with law.
Team Analysis
The directions were issued by chief information commissioner Inderpal Singh while hearing an RTI appeal filed by Bathinda resident Sukhwant Kaur. She had sought records pertaining to a Vigilance Bureau complaint against Punjabi teacher Jaspreet Kaur, who was appointed under disability quota after presenting 42% hearing disability.
The appeal arose after the Vigilance Bureau denied parts of the requested information under the Right to Information Act, but later produced the complete case record during the commission’s proceedings.
During the hearing, the commission noted that while an earlier disability certificate had recorded 42% disability, a subsequent medical reassessment assessed the teacher’s disability at 8%, raising serious questions about the basis of the original certification.
The commission referred to official records showing that the Bathinda civil surgeon had reconstituted a medical board after receiving the complaint. Following a fresh medical examination, the board issued a disability certificate certifying 8% disability.
The civil surgeon subsequently informed the school education department that the certificate issued after the 2022 reassessment, reflecting 8% disability, was valid.
However, the commission observed that despite the findings of the Vigilance Bureau inquiry and the revised medical assessment, the then director, school education (secondary), gave the teacher a clean chit.
Observing that the decision lacked cogent justification, the commission recommended that the chief secretary examine the conduct of the former director and initiate appropriate disciplinary proceedings, if warranted.
In addition, the commission summoned the public information officer in the office of the civil surgeon, Bathinda, along with a responsible official, to explain why records relating to the disability certificate were claimed to have been destroyed in one instance but were stated to have been forwarded to the Vigilance Bureau in another.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on August 13.
