E-Paper
Row over names of union leaders in Govt diary
THE INCLUSION of the names of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalayin Karmachari Sangh office-bearers in the State Government?s new diary for the year 2006 has generated a controversy. The names of the Sangh office-bearers appeared on page 133 of the Government diary.
THE INCLUSION of the names of Madhya Pradesh Sachivalayin Karmachari Sangh office-bearers in the State Government’s new diary for the year 2006 has generated a controversy. The names of the Sangh office-bearers appeared on page 133 of the Government diary.
It was probably the first time when the name of an employees’ association and its office-bearers were published in the Government diary.
The Government Press printed the diaries on behalf of the General Administration Department. Though the Government Press is under the control of Revenue Department, General Administration Department was responsible for publication of diaries. The seeming goof-up made leaders of other employees’ unions angry.
There are 18 recognised employee associations in the State and majority of them hold greater sway among employees than Mantralaya associations. “It appears that only one employee association is working in the State,” said an employee leader. As the diary is not of Mantralaya, names of other associations should also figure in it, he added.
Employee leaders say that instead of printing names of one association’s office-bearers, the State Government should publish names of all recognised associations and their office-bearers.
Talking to the Hindustan Times, Madhya Pradesh Gazetted Employees Association president Dr R D Mishra termed printing name of one association as unfortunate. “If it is necessary, names of office-bearers of all recognised trade unions should figure in the Government diary,” said Mishra.
When contacted, Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Khushiram expressed ignorance about this development. “I have no idea about this episode,” he said.
He said there was no necessity to print the name of one association when there were 18 recognised employee associations in the State. “We will look into the matter and take necessary action against those responsible for this mistake,” he added.
