Bhopal: A sub-registrar posted in Singrauli was dismissed from service for having a third child during government service, even as the action came barely 48 hours after Chief Minister Mohan Yadav announced that no employee would lose a job on the basis of having more than two children.
IG Registration, Madhya Pradesh, issued the dismissal order against sub-registrar Ashok Singh Parihar on Thursday. The order surfaced on Friday. Officials said the action was based on a departmental probe that found that Parihar’s third child was born on November 19, 2003, during his tenure in government service, violating the norms in force at the time.
During the inquiry, Parihar reportedly argued that he was unaware of the two-child norm, but the department rejected the claim, noting that he was in regular government service since 1992.
Sources in the office of the IG Registration said it was an old case and the inquiry had already concluded. They said the decision was taken according to the rules applicable on the date of the order. Sources added that if any future policy change is implemented retrospectively, the official could get relief.
The sources further said delaying the order despite completion of all formalities could have raised suspicion that the case was intentionally kept pending to benefit the officer.
Background of the Case
The dismissal order against Ashok Singh Parihar, a sub-registrar in Singrauli district, was issued by the Inspector General of Registration, Madhya Pradesh. The departmental inquiry found that Parihar had violated the two-child norm, which was in effect at the time of his third child's birth in 2003. Despite his claim of ignorance, the department maintained that as a government employee since 1992, he should have been aware of the rules.
CM's Recent Announcement
Chief Minister Mohan Yadav had recently stated that no government employee would be dismissed solely for having more than two children. However, this case was decided based on the rules applicable at the time of the violation, which predates the CM's assurance.
Sources indicated that the order was not delayed to avoid any suspicion of favoritism. They also mentioned that if future policy changes are applied retrospectively, Parihar might seek relief.
