3941 Life Insurance [ 11 SEP. 1959 ] Corporation Inquiry 3942 DISCUSSION ON THE GOVERN- independence of their judgment, for the MENT RESOLUTION ON THE LIFE admirably clear analysis of the various issues INSURANCE CORPORATION that were involved and for the fairness with INQUIRY which the Commission dealt with every issue. Sir, my regret is great that the Government, in MR. CHAIRMAN: Half an hour is the its final Resolution, did not see its way to the maximum for you. acceptance, to the unreserved acceptance, of the conclusions of the Commission. I am not SHRI B. SHIVA RAO (Mysore): Mr. interested in Mr. Patel as an individual. But I Chairman, Sir, I move: am interested, and I hope the House is interested vitally, in the treatment that is meted out to a civil servant who has put in 35 "That the decisions of the Government of years of distinguished service in many fields, India on the findings of the recent inquiry a man of unusual ability, great drive and into certain affairs of the Life Insurance resourcefulness and integrity. It is not good Corporation as embodied in Government enough to be told at the end of that long Resolution No. F. 15|58-HS, dated the 27 period of service: "You may go because th May, 1959, be taken into consideration." although six Members of the Commission have completely exonerated you, one Member Sir, my main purpose in giving notice of of the Commission has said without this motion is to invite the attention of the supporting his conclusions, that you have House and also of the Government to some been reckless and defiant." general issues of far-reaching importance which seem to me to arise out of this unhappy Sir, in the past, the Government had been episode. But before I refer to them, I would utilising the services of this defiant and like very briefly to deal with one reckless civil servant, when complicated misconception which seems to die hard. Sir, problems arose immediately after partition surprise has been expressed in the course of and assets and liabilities had to be divided the debate in the other House and outside that between India and Pakistan. And this defiant - the Public Service Commission should have and reckless civil servant was asked to take sat in judgment over the report of the Bose charge of the situation in the capital when life Board, a body which was presided over by an was insecure and we owe it very largely to his eminent judge of the Supreme Court and that initiative that things did not get worse in the it should have been regarded as a court of dangerous period following partition. appeal from the findings of the Bose Board. Sir, with regard to the general issues to Sir, in the first place, I would like to point which I referred, there are, I think, three. One out that this Board was only a Board of is as regards the procedure to be adopted in Enquiry. It did not take evidence on oath; and cases of this kind in future. I rule out cases in under the Constitution, the report of such a which there have been allegations of Board must be referred to the Public Service corruption or mala fides. In such cases the Commission before the Government takes ordinary law of the land must take its normal final action. I regret to say that many harsh course. But there may be cases in which there things have been said about the Public Service are no allegations of any corruption or mala Commission in this connection and therefore, fides. In this case neither the Chagla I think it will not be out of place for me to say Commission nor the Bose Board nor the that so far as I am concerned, I pay a very Public Service Commission have ever sincere tribute to the Members of that suggested that there was any corruption or Commission for the objectivity of their mala fides on approach, for the courage of their convictions, for the 3943 Life Insurance [ RAJYA SABHA 1 Corporation Inquiry 3944 [Shri B. Shiva Rao] the part of any board of three senior retired officials to hold a individual. Therefore. Sir, the question of formal enquiry. That board held that procedure has to be determined in regard to incorruptibility and efficiency are the two all such cases in future. obvious requirements in administration. "In the present case corruption has not been in The second point of general importance question, inefficiency has." And then the seems to me to be the precise relationship board suggested that the senior-most official betwen the Minister and his civil servants. who was most responsible for this transcation And the third is Parliament's responsibility in should be transferred. That was the dealing with reports of the kind that have been punishment meted out to him, that he should placed before us and the manner in which we be transferred from one Ministry to another, discharge our responsibilities. so that his experience and knowledge may not be lost to the State. I would like to refer very briefly io a case which attracted much attention in England in What did the Minister of Agriculture do the last three or four years, a case which bears when this report came to his hands? He did a striking similarity to this LIC case in some not issue a statement from a distance of its essential features. In that case Sir, which defending himself and sacrificing his officials. is known as the Crichel Down Case, the The Minister went to the House of Commons Minister of Agriculture had to agree, under to shield his officials from harsh criticism by pressure from the House of Commons, to the the Board and also by certain members of the appointment of an enquiry into the conduct of Opposition. He said: certain officials who were supposed to have misled him into taking an unsound decision. Finally the Prime Minister appointed a single- "I, as Minister, must accept full man commission, a legal authority of responsibility to Parliament for the standing, to hold a preliminary and in camera mistakes and inefficiency of officials in my enquiry into the facts of the case. That Department, just as when my officials bring Commission reported and I am quoting one off any successes on my behalf, I take full sentence from that report: credit for them. Any departure from this long-established rule is bound to bring the "the true facts and considerations were Civil Service right into the political arena, not fully brought to the Minister's notice". and that we should all, on both sides of Ihe House, deprecate most vigorously" The report also says that there was a deliberate reluctance on the part of his Sir, this was the view expressed by the officials to invite the attention of the Minister Minister of Agriculture in handing in his to the financial unsoundness of a particular resignation. transaction. But the Commission was satisfied—and here again I quote— SHRI BHUPESH GUPTA (West Bengal): "there was no trace in this case of Did he write any pamphlet and distribute it? I anything in the nature of bribery, am just making an enquiry. corruption or personal dishonesty". That, Sir, was the first stage of the enquiry, MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, order. the in camera preliminary investigation. And on the basis of that report, the Prime Minister SHRI B SHIVA RAO: From the side of the went to the next stage and appointed a Opposition came a very remarkable statement from Mr. Herbert Morrison, at one time himself Home Secretary in the Labour Government. Mr. Herbert Morrison said: 3945 Life Insurance [ 11 SEP. 1959 ] Corporation Inquiry 3946 "The morale and the efficiency of the in order to give the officials concerned all Civil Service can be hurt in two ways. It facilities for fair defence, the first step that can be hurt by a failure to check something should have been taken was for Mr. which interferes with its work and it can be Krshnamachari to have handed in his hurt by an unjust denunciation of the whole resignation. To be fair to him, I think he did service". so, though at what stage I cannot tell, because he himself has not made that point clear. But Finally, Sir,—and this is a very important to be fair to him, Mr. Krishnamachari did aspect of that debate to which I call the offer his resignation at the time of the Chagla attention of the House—the Home Secretary, enquiry. Unfortunately, the Prime Minister I mean the present Home Secretary, whom we did not accept his resignation and it was Mr.. call the Home Minister here, laid down Krishnamachari who appointed Justice certain principles which must apply in all Chagla to be the single-man commission. And cases, governing the relations between the the report of the Chagla Commission was M'nister and his Civil Servants. He said: again submitted to Mr. Krishnamachari. That, I am afraid, prevented all the facts from "In a case where there is an explicit coming to light. order by a Minis'.er, the Minister must protect the Civil Servant who has carried I will quote one paragraph from the Bose out his order. Equally, where the Civil Board's Report on this subject. Servant acts properly in accordance with the policy la;d down by the Minister, the "In endeavouring to ascertain the truth . Minister must protect and defend him." . ." And then he said: I am quoting from page 160 of the Bose Board's Report.