Bizarre incident in Unnao: Notice served to a deceased sanitation worker
Uttar Pradesh. A shocking case of negligence in government work has come to light from Unnao district of UP. Here, in the government documents, the duty of a sweeper who had died about six months ago was assigned. Not only this, a show cause notice was also issued holding the same deceased employee responsible for lack of cleanliness in the villages. After the matter came to light, serious questions have been raised regarding departmental functioning and maintenance of government records. The entire matter is of Fatehpur Chaurasi development block of Unnao district.
According to the information, under the Communicable Disease Control Campaign in Fatehpur Chaurasi Block, sanitation workers were put on duty for cleanliness in the villages. A proper roster was prepared for this. The name of sweeper Harishchandra was also included in this roster. The surprising thing is that Harishchandra had died about six months ago. Despite this, his name was recorded in the government documents and it was mentioned that he had to do the cleaning work for 43 days.
The matter of showing the deceased sweeper on duty in the government papers did not stop here. When there was no cleanliness in the villages, Harishchandra was held responsible for this also. Holding him responsible for negligence, a show cause notice was issued by the department. Through this notice, he was asked to answer for not carrying out cleaning work in the villages. Now the question is being raised that on what basis was the cleaning work mentioned about the employee who died six months ago and how was his reply sought.
The most shocking thing in the case is that the name of the deceased employee was recorded in the roster prepared for the communicable disease control campaign. Under the campaign, the responsibility of cleanliness was fixed in the villages. Despite this, the actual status of the employee concerned was not taken into account while preparing the roster. It was mentioned in the government documents that the cleaning work was carried out for 43 days in the name of Harishchandra. Due to this, questions are also being raised on the process of preparing and checking the roster.
The matter became even more serious after the show cause notice issued on November 12. In the notice, an answer has been sought from Harishchandra regarding not maintaining cleanliness in the villages. Issuance of notice in the name of an employee who had died about six months ago highlights a major lapse in government functioning. On one hand, the duties of the deceased employee were shown in the documents, while on the other hand, due to non-fulfillment of work, the process of summoning an answer was started against him.
This matter of Fatehpur Chaurasi development block has now become a topic of discussion. The revelation that the name of the deceased sweeper was included in the government documents and then a notice was issued against him has created a stir. This entire incident has also raised questions on the system of timely updating of records related to employees. If the information about the death of the employee was recorded in the relevant records, then how his name got included in the roster of the campaign is a matter of investigation.
Under the communicable disease control campaign, cleanliness in villages has special importance. In such a campaign, a roster is made to fix the responsibilities of the employees, so that cleaning work can be done in the designated areas. But due to the inclusion of the name of a deceased employee in the roster prepared in Fatehpur Chaurasi block, questions are being raised on the entire system. On paper, the duty of a sweeper was imposed, whereas in reality that employee was not in this world.
In this case, the question is also arising that when cleanliness work was done for 43 days in the name of Harishchandra, then how was the actual situation of cleanliness system in the concerned villages assessed. Apart from this, in case of lack of cleanliness, why was the information related to the employee not checked before issuing the notice. From the roster to the show cause notice, the name of the same employee being recorded indicates negligence at the departmental level.
This case that came to light in Unnao has exposed the difference between the information recorded in government papers and the ground reality. The sanitation worker, who died six months ago, was first given the responsibility of the communicable disease control campaign and then an answer was sought from him for not cleaning. Now in this entire matter, questions are being raised regarding the process of preparing the roster, including the name of the employee and issuing the notice. At present, there is a stir in the department after the revelation of this negligence.