SRINAGAR: The Supreme Court (SC) on Monday directed the Chief Justice (CJ) of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) High Court to investigate complaints related to the alleged recruitment of administrative staff through unauthorized means at the J&K High Court, Subordinate Courts, State Judicial Academy, Legal Services Authority, and the e-Court Mission Mode Project.
During a hearing on a petition filed by J&K Peoples Forum, a bench consisting of CJI D Y Chandrachud, Justice P S Narasimha, and Justice J B Pardiwala was informed that the petition alleged that the appointment of administrative staff at the J&K High Court, Subordinate Courts, State Judicial Academy, Legal Services Authority, and the e-Court Mission Mode Project were not carried out in accordance with due selection procedures. The petition specifically claimed that the relatives of existing staff members, as well as present and former judges of the High Court, were appointed through unofficial channels.
The bench said: “We will ask the Chief Justice of the High Court to look into the grievance of the petition. Time for filing counter affidavit has been extended. Counter shall be filed by the Registrar of J&K High Court after specifically taking instructions and directions from the CJ of J&K High Court.”
The petition filed challenges appointments made from 2007 onwards that were either temporary or made through advertisements, citing them as “suspicious.” Additionally, the petition presents a list that indicates the current staff members and High Court judges who allegedly provided preferential treatment to their relatives and acquaintances during the recruitment process.
It states: “There are instances where amendments have been made in the existing rules just to facilitate backdoor appointments and or or facilitating the appointment of kin of functionaries against higher cadres who otherwise were eligible only for lower cadres and that that too if selected after a regular legal recruitment process.”
According to the petition, the appointments were made without a transparent selection process. It claims that there was no public notice or advertisement issued, and the selection of appointees was arbitrary. The petition emphasizes that there were several highly qualified candidates who could have been selected if a fair and just selection process was followed.
The petition contended that a large number of daily wagers employed in various courts for over a decade had not been regularised, with only those who had close connections with High Court officers being considered for regularisation.
Furthermore, the petition demanded that the Supreme Court quash these backdoor appointments and direct the respondents to refrain from making any more such appointments. Additionally, the petition implored the apex court to direct a credible agency to conduct an inquiry into the allegations of backdoor appointments of administrative staff in the High Court against both the officials involved in the process of making such appointments and those who have benefited from them.
The petition has been filed through AoR, Raj Kishore Choudhary. (Live Law)
“In late February 2023, media reports highlighted how the OSAF improperly disclosed Official Military Personnel Files (OMPF) of 11 servicemembers without appropriate authorization or lawful consent. The [Office of the Secretary of the Air Force] reportedly released the personnel files of at least two Members of Congress to an opposition research firm that received money from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC),” they wrote.
“While the Air Force has rightfully taken responsibility for these inappropriate OMPF disclosures, questions remain unanswered about the U.S. Air Force’s collection, maintenance, and dissemination of this sensitive information,” their letter to Kendall continued.
Other panels, including the House Armed Services and Oversight committees, have sought details from the Pentagon on the disclosures.
POLITICO first reported that the Air Force had notified at least two sitting House Republicans — Reps. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) and Zach Nunn (R-Iowa) — that it had improperly released their personnel military records to a third party.
In the case of Bacon, a letter last month from the Air Force identified Abraham Payton of the Due Diligence Group, a research firm with Democratic ties, as “inappropriately” requesting and successfully obtaining these records.
Payton, according to the letter, said he was seeking the records for employment and benefit purposes, but the Air Force acknowledged such records were released without their authorization, which is protected under the Privacy Act of 1974. The letter noted that Payton was already in possession of the Nebraska Republican’s social security number when filling out the information request form.
Other GOP candidates from last cycle have shared that they were similarly notified by the Air Force that Payton, a former research director for the Democratic group American Bridge, was behind such requests for their records. They include Sam Peters, a Republican who challenged Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) in November, and Kevin Dellicker, who fell short in the GOP primary race to take on Rep. Susan Wild (D-Pa.).
Such efforts by Due Diligence Group included more than one military branch, with Payton attempting to get records on Colin Schmitt, who is currently serving in the New York National Guard and who challenged Rep. Pat Ryan (D-N.Y.) in the general election last cycle for the state’s 18th district, according to a copy of the request form.
The Air Force said last month that an internal investigation it launched after POLITICO reported on former GOP candidate Jennifer-Ruth Green’s military records in October — when she was challenging Rep. Frank Mrvan (D-Ind.) in a battleground district — found that the private records of 11 individuals were improperly disclosed to a third party.
Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek has said that “virtually all” of the 11 unapproved releases were made to the same third party “who represented himself as a background investigator seeking service records for employment purposes.”
It is unclear if Payton was behind all of the 11 Air Force requests. Nunn has not publicly disclosed if Payton was the individual who sought his military personnel records, and Green has confirmed only that Due Diligence sought hers.
The other individuals affected by the Air Force records releases are not publicly known. But the House Armed Services and Oversight committees are also inquiring about the matter, with Armed Services Chair Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) vowing last week to keep chasing down details of the disclosures.
POLITICO was told by the person who gave it Green’s military records last year that they were obtained through a public records request. POLITICO reviewed the request for the records made by a third party, which sought a “publicly releasable/redacted copy of OMPF [Official Military Personnel File] per Freedom of Information Act statutes.” The requester identified the purpose of the request as relating to “benefits,” “employment” and “other.”
POLITICO also reviewed the letter sent in response to the requester. A military employee responded with a password-protected version of the file with limited redactions. After publication, the Air Force said it erred in releasing the records and launched an investigation.
Bacon said last month that Air Force Secretary Kendall informed him that material from the Air Force’s internal investigation into the records releases was turned over to the Justice Department for possible further action. And Schmitt is joining all five GOP Air Force veterans in calling for a DOJ inquiry into whether political research crossed into criminal activity.
The Justice Department has declined to comment on questions related to the existence or the status of a possible investigation into the unauthorized disclosures, but in a statement on Sunday, a DOJ spokesperson said they are “aware of the concerns raised” and that the department has been “communicating with the U.S. Air Force about this matter.”
Stewart and Jordan also asked for the Air Force to turn over requests made by DDG from the start of January 2021 to the present, all the notifications to affected servicemembers that their information was improperly impacted, documents related to its policies on record disclosure policies, and files on any internal investigations into the matter.
“My proudest years were spent defending our great nation in the Air Force. It’s a shame to see this sacred branch of our government weaponized, but we will right this wrong,” tweeted Stewart, a member of the Republican-led subcommittee, arguing that they will “demand accountability.”
[ad_2]
#House #GOP #panel #launches #probe #Air #Forces #unauthorized #record #disclosures
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
BUDGAM, MARCH 10: As many as 41 employees were served show- cause notice for their un-authorized absence from duties in Budgam today.
Under the directions of Deputy Commissioner Budgam, an inspection team led by Additional Deputy Commissioner (ADC), Budgam, Dr Nasir Ahmad conducted surprise inspections of various office at DC Office, KPDCL and other offices and 41 employees were found un-authorizedly absent from their duties.
While checking the attendance (Bio- Metric), 41 employees of various categories have been found absent and served show- cause notice as to why action as warranted under rules shall not be initiated against them.
Meanwhile, DC Budgam S F Hamid said that these employees were found unauthorisedly absent from their duties which is complete dereliction and lackadaisical approach towards legitimate duties and warrants disciplinary action under rules. The absentees have been directed to explain their position within stipulated timeframe, failing which action as warranted under rules will be initiated against them.
He said that the government has adopted zero tolerance against the dereliction of duties by employees.
He further directed employees to perform their duties regularly in letter and spirit and ensure prompt services delivery to the general public.
The DOJ declined to comment. Air Force spokesperson Ann Stefanek said “virtually all” of the 11 unapproved releases were made to the same third party “who represented himself as a background investigator seeking service records for employment purposes.”
The revelation follows the uproar over the disclosure of Indiana House GOP candidate Jennifer-Ruth Green’s military records after POLITICO reported on them in October. And it promises to intensify Republicans’ already keen interest in investigating whether other sitting members of Congress were affected — as well as the role that a Democratic-linked research firm played in the episode.
The Air Force launched its audit after the disclosure of Green’s records, according to Stefanek.
The Feb. 7 letter Bacon received from the Air Force names Abraham Payton of the research firm Due Diligence LLC as the person who “inappropriately requested copies of your military personnel records for the stated purpose of employment and benefits,” adding that Payton was already in possession of Bacon’s Social Security number. Payton is a former research director for the Democratic political group American Bridge.
Both Bacon and Nunn are calling for an investigation into whether political opposition research turned into illegal activity.
“I understand the evidence has been turned over to the Department of Justice and I expect those who break the law to be prosecuted,” Bacon said in a statement to POLITICO. “This was more than just ‘dirty tricks’ by Democrat operatives, but likely violations of the law.”
Nunn also suggested that the disclosure of his records amounted to criminal activity.
“The recent targeting of Members of Congress’s personnel military records [and] the breach of sensitive data … taken by political hacks isn’t only a violation of public trust — it’s criminal,” he said in a statement.
How it began
Bacon said the Air Force began looking into the matter in response to what happened to Green, who lost a battleground-district race in November to Rep. Frank Mrvan (D-Ind.).
The Air Force publicly acknowledged the unauthorized release of Green’s records to “a third party,” though it did not specify whether that person was the same individual who provided them to POLITICO during the campaign.
POLITICO was told by the person who gave it Green’s military records that they were obtained through a public records request. POLITICO reviewed the request for the records made by a third party, which sought a “publicly releasable/redacted copy of OMPF [Official Military Personnel File] per Freedom of Information Act statutes.” The requester identified the purpose of the request as relating to “benefits,” “employment” and “other.”
POLITICO also reviewed the letter sent in response to the requester. A military employee responded with a password-protected version of the file with limited redactions. After publication, the Air Force said it erred in releasing the records and launched an investigation.
Stefanek, the Air Force spokesperson, said in an October statement that a “preliminary” inquiry found Green’s “service record was released to a third party by a junior individual who didn’t follow proper procedures and obtain required consent.”
After POLITICO’s initial reporting on Green’s Air Force records, Green responded that the material was “illegally” obtained. Her records referenced a sexual assault she experienced during her time in service.
Green blamed Mrvan and his allies for the release. Mrvan’s campaign has denied any involvement, and a spokesperson for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee told Fox News at the time that “we would never use anyone’s experience with sexual assault against them.”
Green spokesperson Kevin Hansberger said in a statement last week that the release of her “and other Republicans’ personal records is reprehensible and illegal.”
“There must be full transparency of the investigation and its findings. Those responsible for these illegal acts should face criminal charges and be held accountable for their actions,” Hansberger added.
Hansberger reiterated Green’s previous argument that political opponents were behind the release of her records, saying that the incident shows that Democrats “will go to any lengths necessary, even breaking the law, to protect their interests.”
DCCC did not return a request for comment on whether it received and used materials provided by Due Diligence Group during the 2022 midterms. According to Federal Election Commission records, the House Democratic campaign arm paid Due Diligence just over $110,000 between January 2021 and December 2022.
Due Diligence’s website states that it uses “public records research to provide our clients with the knowledge and insights needed to drive strategic decision making.”
It’s unclear whether Payton and Due Diligence were the only third-party entities that sought the service records.
Stefanek, the Air Force spokesperson, said in a response to written questions: “Virtually all unauthorized disclosures were in response to a third party who represented himself as a background investigator seeking service records for employment purposes through a process commonly used by other federal agencies to conduct employee background checks.”
Due Diligence did not respond to requests for comment. Payton, whom POLITICO attempted to reach at an email address connected to Due Diligence, did not respond to a request for comment.
Tracking the extent of the releases
The Republican chairs of the House Oversight and Armed Services Committees publicly revealed last week that the Air Force had improperly released the records of 11 people to “a private research firm which allegedly misrepresented itself in order to obtain access.” That GOP letter also identified Due Diligence as the firm that obtained Green’s records.
Armed Services Chair Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) and Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) asked Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin in their letter last week for the full list of people affected by improper records disclosures.
The House GOP duo also sought details on any actions — “administrative or punitive” — taken against those involved in the unauthorized release, and whether any criminal referrals have taken place regarding the matter.
“This news comes on the heels of a prior admission by the Air Force to having inappropriately released the [military personnel files] of former Republican Congressional candidate Jennifer-Ruth Green to the very same research firm, Due Diligence Group,” Rogers and Comer wrote. “That disclosure served to revictimize a servicemember by releasing details about her sexual assault.”
The House GOP committee chairs mentioned only Due Diligence in their letter, not Payton. Additionally, Nunn provided no further information regarding the notification he received of the unauthorized release.
Rogers and Comer asked the Pentagon chief to provide further information by Feb. 27, arguing that “it is essential that the men and women of the Armed Forces trust their leadership’s ability to protect private personnel data from improper disclosure.”
POLITICO contacted more than a dozen House Republican lawmakers and 2022 candidates who served in the Air Force to ask whether the military has notified them of an authorized disclosure similar to those experienced by Green, Bacon and Nunn. None replied in the affirmative.
The releases of records occurred between October 2021 and October 2022, according to Air Force spokesperson Stefanek.
“Department of the Air Force employees did not follow proper procedures requiring the member’s authorizing signature consenting to the release of information. There was no evidence of political motivation or malicious intent on the part of any employee,” Stefanek wrote.
She added that the “Air Force takes full responsibility for releasing the personally identifiable information of these individuals. Records-release procedures have been improved by elevating the approval level for release of information to third parties and conducting intensified retraining for personnel who handle record requests.”
The letter Bacon received from the Air Force’s Texas-based personnel center states that its investigation revealed “no criminal action or malicious intent” on the part of the military employee who released his information.
Bacon, however, is pushing for more information on whether the DCCC or the Democratic-linked House Majority super PAC played any role in the military’s releases of the information.
House Majority PAC said it had no relationship with Due Diligence during the 2022 campaign cycle and did not use the firm’s work in any activity on the Green-Mrvan race.
[ad_2]
#GOP #lawmakers #seek #investigation #unauthorized #disclosure #Air #Force #records
( With inputs from : www.politico.com )
5 employees of RDD suspended for unauthorized absence
KULGAM, Jan 30: On the directions of the Deputy Commissioner Kulgam, Dr. Bilal Mohi-Ud-Din Bhat, a team of officers headed by ACD Kulgam, Mohammad Imran inspected several offices of Rural Development Department in Kulgam.
During the inspection, 5 employees were found unauthorisedly absent from their duties at DK Marg block and were placed under suspension with immediate effect.
News WhatsApp Group Links – Join Now
Moreover, ACD stressed on 100 percent attendance at all offices of Rural Development Department Kulgam and directed all employees to attend their duties regularly in letter and spirit.
He warned that strict action as warranted under rules shall be taken against employees for their unauthorized absence from duties.
CLICK ON THE BELOW PROVIDED LINKS TO FOLLOW KASHMIR NEWS ON:
OUR APPLICATION IS ALSO LIVE ON GOOGLE PLAY STORE, DOWNLOAD MOBILE APPLICATION
KULGAM, JANUARY 29: On the directions of the Deputy Commissioner Kulgam, Dr. Bilal Mohi-Ud-Din Bhat, a team of officers headed by ACD Kulgam, Mohammad Imran inspected several offices of Rural Development Department in Kulgam.
During the inspection, 05 employees were found unauthorisedly absent from their duties at DK Marg block and were placed under suspension with immediate effect.
Moreover, ACD stressed on 100 percent attendance at all offices of Rural Development Department Kulgam and directed all employees to attend their duties regularly in letter and spirit.
He warned that strict action as warranted under rules shall be taken against employees for their unauthorized absence from duties.
Jammu & Kashmir: 11 Employees of Suspended for Unauthorized Absence From Duties
11 Employees of RDD suspended for unauthorized absence from duties at Kulgam
KULGAM, JANUARY 21 (KN): On the directions of Deputy Commissioner (DC) Kulgam, Dr.Bilal Mohi-Ud-Din Bhat, a team of officers headed by Assistant Commissioner Development (ACD) Kulgam, Mohammad Imran inspected several offices of Rural Development Department in Kulgam.
During the inspection, 11 employees were found unauthorisedly absent from their duties and were placed under suspension with immediate effect vide order No12-ACDK of 023.
Moreover, ACD stressed on cent percent attendance at all offices of Rural Development Department Kulgam and directed all employees to attend their duties regularly.
He warned that strict action shall be taken as per the law against employees for their unauthorized absence from duties.(KN)
ALSO READ: Jammu & Kashmir Govt Sacked Employees For Fraud Recruitment- Know Name Of These Employees Here
ALSO READ: Area wise List Of State Land In Kashmir Division- Check Here
CLICK ON THE BELOW PROVIDED LINKS TO FOLLOW KASHMIR NEWS ON:
