Different yardsticks for different officers in WAPCOS

An untimely demise of a young Executive Engineer, due to alleged acute harassment by the WAPCOS management posting him to a far-flung area raised a serious concern. On the one hand, the management is shifting the officers to the last corner of the country while tainted officers—facing vigilance investigation and corruption charges—are being provided preferred postings on the other.

According to sources, the management is applying different yardsticks for different officers in the company. Sources point to a gatekeeper system —an informal filter (Advocate) that emerged with the CMD from a previous posting—through which decisions allegedly pass, instead of being governed strictly by service rules.

It is noteworthy that an officer against whom the Ministry had advised action after the submission of vigilance report, was not prosecuted nor any action was taken against him. Instead, he was entrusted with a highly lucrative and powerful charge of contracts and construction management. In sharp contrast, another officer, already under severe mental distress following the death of his child, was transferred from Gurugram to Chennai, and his request for retention on humanitarian grounds was rejected.

The comparison raises a disturbing inference: crossing the gatekeeper brings protection and reward, while failing to do so results in hardship, irrespective of merit, vigilance status, or human considerations. The episode has intensified concerns that discretion has overtaken law, and that the expected humane touch—often associated with women leadership—has been conspicuously absent in the administration of this PSU.

Feedback / Inquiries