By Our Correspondent
BHUBANESWAR: There is a saying—“when the fence itself starts eating the crop.” In other words, if the very guardians of the law twist and manipulate it for personal gain, the entire system comes under suspicion.
A similar incident has reportedly come to light at the office of the Odisha Electricity Regulatory Commission (OERC). A senior and powerful officer of the commission is accused of bending government rules to serve personal interests. Although such irregularities have surfaced through information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, no action has been taken so far. Meanwhile, the officer is nearing retirement, while the allegations against him risk being buried due to a lack of investigation.
The allegations have been made against OERC Secretary Priyabrata Pattanaik. It is alleged that Mr. Pattanaik came on deputation to OERC from his parent organization, GRIDCO in 2005 and has continued working there ever since, allegedly violating multiple government rules during his tenure. Based on RTI findings, a person named Balaram Champataray has lodged a complaint with the state government.
According to the complaint, Mr. Pattanaik served on deputation as Deputy Director from July 2005 to June 2008 (3 years). From June 2008 to April 2012 (3 years 10 months), he held the post of Joint Director. Since 2012, after being appointed as Director (Regulatory Affairs), he has continued to remain in the organization.
Surprisingly, government rules clearly define deputation limits. An employee can serve a maximum of 10 years on deputation during their career, and not more than 6 years continuously in a single organization. After 6 years, a mandatory cooling-off period of at least 3 years in the parent organization is required. However, in Mr. Pattanaik’s case, these rules were allegedly ignored. From July 2005 to July 10, 2015, he remained in OERC for over 10 years without returning to his parent organization, and reportedly did not even obtain the required No Objection Certificate (NOC) from GRIDCO. This raises serious questions about why the cooling-off rule was not enforced in his case.
Following complaints, the then OERC Chairman S.P. Nanda reportedly instructed Mr. Pattanaik to either return to his parent organization or join OERC permanently. Subsequently, on May 31, 2016, Mr. Pattanaik expressed willingness to continue at OERC. However, his deputation had officially ended on July 10, 2015, creating a gap of about 10 months and 20 days. Questions were raised about his official status during this period. To address this, a letter issued later stated that his permanent appointment would be effective retrospectively from July 11, 2015, though such retrospective appointments are reportedly against OERC rules.
Further allegations claim that Mr. Pattanaik used his experience and influence to manipulate departmental processes and maintain control over financial matters. It is also alleged that he drew a house building advance of ₹20 lakh in violation of rules, as such advances require property ownership either in one’s own name or jointly with a spouse. In this case, the property was reportedly in his wife’s name, raising questions about how the loan was sanctioned.
Another financial irregularity relates to his CPF (Contributory Provident Fund). Despite being a permanent employee of OERC for over 10 years, his CPF contributions are allegedly still being deposited through the OPTCL account, which has raised eyebrows. Under OPTCL rules, employees can continue CPF contributions for up to 2 years after retirement to avail tax benefits.
It is alleged that Mr. Pattanaik leveraged this provision for personal benefit.The complaint also alleges that Mr. Pattanaik had close ties with a former influential OERC member, K. C. Badu. On April 4, 2012—the day Mr. Badu was due to retire—an interview was reportedly conducted hastily in the morning, and Mr. Pattanaik was promoted from Joint Director to Director, with Mr. Badu being part of the interview board. This has raised concerns about favoritism and conflict of interest.
Additionally, it is alleged that recruitment advertisements for the post of Secretary were tailored to suit Mr. Pattanaik, thereby excluding other eligible candidates and allowing him to continue in the position for years.
It is noteworthy that after a written complaint was filed with the State Vigilance Department, the Energy Department’s Additional Secretary, Lipsa Das, had directed OERC (via letter dated January 11, 2022) to investigate the matter and submit a report. However, it is alleged that the directive has not been acted upon and remains buried in bureaucratic delays.
Questions are now being raised as to why the Vigilance Department, which often acts against lower-level officials, has remained silent in this case. With Mr. Pattanaik set to retire on March 31, reports suggest he is attempting to secure a two-year extension.
Despite serious allegations, the silence of OERC authorities, the Vigilance Department, the Law Department, the Energy Department, and even the Chief Minister’s Office has become a matter of public discussion. Many believe that only a thorough investigation by the Vigilance Department can bring out the truth.
