LG nod to probe against Delhi govt revenue official

According to officials in the LG secretariat, the complaints against the then sub-registrar of Janakpuri were lodged in 2019 and 2020

Lieutenant governor VK Saxena on Wednesday granted permission to conduct an investigation against an official in the Delhi government’s revenue department on charges of corruption, officials aware of the matter said.

The approval was given to carry out the probe under Section 17A of the Prevention Corruption Act (PCA), 1988 against the suspended sub-registrar accused of demanding bribes from applicants for official work, the officials said. (Representational image)

The approval was given to carry out the probe under Section 17A of the Prevention Corruption Act (PCA), 1988 against the suspended sub-registrar accused of demanding bribes from applicants for official work, the officials said.

According to officials in the LG secretariat, the complaints against the then sub-registrar of Janakpuri were lodged in 2019 and 2020.

“In the complaint filed on March 19, 2020, the complainant alleged that he paid ₹30,000 as bribe through an agent for registering of mortgagee deed on his Gulab Bagh property in Uttam Nagar. The bribe amount was collected for not affixing the stamp of ‘Booked Property’ with Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) due to unauthorised construction. In the complaint filed on November 4, 2019, it was alleged that the accused allegedly withheld documents without reason, which was also corroborated in the findings of the committee constituted by the west district, which was supervised by the SDM (Rajouri Garden),” a senior official said, asking not to be named.

Another official said that the west district’s committee also observed that the accused was found in possession of a large number of registered documents without bona fide reason. “As per this committee’s report, the accused was also found to indulge in other acts such as opening his office in late hours without permission of higher officers or delivering of documents without obtaining signatures of parties. This is irrefutable evidence of acts of omission and commission against him, which was later also seconded by the district magistrate (west) in his findings,” the second officer said, asking not to be named.