A Maharatna Company

A Maharatna Company

NTPC LIMITED
(A GOVT. OF INDIA ENTERPRISE)

Complaint Handling
Policy

VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT

NTPC Bhawan, Scope Complex, 7, Institutional Area

Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 1

 A Maharatna Company

I N D E X
Sl.No. T o p i c
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Complaint
3.0 Sources of Complaints
4.0 Lodging a complaint
5.0 Information required while making a complaint
6.0 Types of Complaints
7.0 Action on complaints
8.0 Action on complaints referred by the CVC
9.0 Action on complaints under the purview of the Administrative
Ministry
10.0 Processing of complaints
11.0 Time frame for Verification
12.0 Format of Verification Report
13.0 Action on Verification Report
14.0 Time frame for Investigation
15.0 Format of Investigation Report
16.0 Action on Investigation Report
17.0 Action against persons making false complaints
Reference

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 2

 A Maharatna Company

1.0 Introduction :-

1.1 NTPC believes in the highest level of personal and institutional integrity.
The core values of the Company are ‘Be-Committed’ – Business Ethics,
Environmentally & Economically Sustainable, Customer Focus,
Organizational & Professional Pride, Mutual Respect and Trust, Motivating
Self & Others, Innovation & Speed, Total quality for Excellence,
Transparent & Respected organization, Enterprising, Devoted.

The Company has zero tolerance approach towards any form of

corruption.

1.2 The Complaint Handling Policy is designed to provide guidance on the

manner in which NTPC receives and handles complaints against its
employees, suppliers / contractors etc.

1.3 The objective of the Policy is to assist the Management and public in
general handling of complaints in an efficient, effective and professional
manner wherein every possible step is taken to ensure that instances of
misconduct do not escape scrutiny and action, while at the same time, the
morale of the employees is not adversely affected by complaints of trivial
nature.

1.4 The Chief Vigilance Officer (CVO) and Heads of Projects / Regions /
Offices may cause an enquiry into any complaint concerning the functions
/ activities of any of the projects / Regions/ Joint Ventures / subsidiaries /
CC of the company.

1.5 This policy has been designed in line with the guidelines / instructions
issued by Government of India and Central Vigilance Commission (CVC),
from time to time.

1.6 Philosophy of complaint handling :-

• The Complaint Handling Policy is available on NTPC website and also on

the intranet.

• The Complaint Handling Policy is readily accessible to all stake holders and
public. The Policy is easy to understand and includes details on making
and resolving complaints.

• Complaints given in person are acknowledged immediately / Complainants

will be treated courteously.

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 3

 A Maharatna Company

• Each complaint is addressed in an equitable, objective and unbiased

manner in line with the Complaint Handling Policy.

• There is no fee/cost to the complainant for making a complaint.

• A person making false complaints is liable for prosecution and/or

disciplinary action, in case he/she is a public servant / employee of NTPC.

• Information regarding personal identity etc. of complainants shall not be

disclosed, if so desired by the complainant.

• The Vigilance Officer will ensure that the complaints are addressed in
transparent and fair manner within the specified/reasonable time frame.

• Based on the feedback received, the Company shall initiate necessary

action for systemic improvements.

2.0 Complaint :-

Receipt of information about corruption, malpractice or misconduct, from

whatever source, would be termed as a complaint.

(Clause 3.1 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual 2005).

3.0 Sources of complaints :-

Information about corruption, malpractice or misconduct on the part of

NTPC employees, suppliers/contractors etc. may be received either (i)
directly from employees of the NTPC Ltd., (ii) from the public, (iii) from
Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) / Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI), (iv) from Management, (v) allegations in press, (vi) Vigilance
surveillance checks, (vii) Audit Reports, (viii) through source information,
etc.

(Clause 3.2.1 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual 2005)

4.0 Lodging a complaint :-

Complaints can be lodged by addressing the letter / e-mail directly to the

CVO at the e-mail indicated in the standard notice boards displayed in the
Units / Offices, and also to the Vigilance Head of the respective Unit /
Region, giving specific facts of the matter. The complaint can also be
lodged directly on the NTPC website / CVC website.

(CVC circular no. 14/6/09 dated 5th June, 2009).

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 4

 A Maharatna Company

5.0 Information required while making a complaint :-

The Vigilance Department deals mainly with matters related to corruption
and / or where there is a vigilance angle. Only those complaints which
contain allegations of corruption / indicate presence of vigilance angle will
be addressed. Complaints must contain factual details, verifiable facts
and related matters. They should not be vague or contain sweeping
allegations. Complaints which do not meet the above criteria may be filed
or dropped.

6.0 Types of complaints :-

All complaints received by Vigilance are classified as under:-

• Identifiable or signed complaints (s) : These are complaints wherein

the identity of the complainant is mentioned by virtue of name, contact
details etc. Further, the complainant owns/confirms the details
mentioned in the complaint, when the complainant is contacted at the
address/contact no. mentioned in the complaint.

• Pseudonymous complaints (Ps): These are complaints wherein the

identity of the complainant is mentioned by virtue of name, contact
details etc. However, when the signatory of the complaint is contacted at
the address/contact no. mentioned in the complaint, the complaint is
either disowned or there is no response within a reasonable time.

• Anonymous Complaints (A): These are complaints where the

complainant has not revealed, verifiable or traceable or contactable
identity while making the complaint.

• Source information(s): Source information received by the VE shall be

reduced in writing and shall be treated as signed complaint.

• Whistle Blower complaints, otherwise known as Public Interest

Disclosure and Protection of Informer (PIDPI), Complaints (P) :

CVC is the designated agency for receiving PIDPI complaints. Such

complaints should be made to the CVC in the manner prescribed by the
Commission. Complaints under PIDPI can be made only by post. These
are complaints wherein the identity of the complainant is kept
confidential, and the CVC forwards only the details of the complaint as
‘source complaint’. The identity of the complainant is not revealed so as
to ensure that the complainant is not victimized. The envelope should be
super scribed ‘PIDPI’ or ‘Whistle Blower’. The complainant should refrain
from giving his name on the body of the letter. The personal details

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 5

 A Maharatna Company

should be separately given or given at the top or end of the letter so that
they can be easily blocked out.

(CVC Office Order No. 38/6/2004 dated 8th June, 2004, 33/5/04 dated 17th May,
2004 10/02/05 dated 10th March 2005, 4/2/09 dated 27th February, 2009 and
9/5/09 dated 12th May, 2009)

Whistle Blower (PIDPI) complaints received in the office of CVO, NTPC

shall be processed as per the extant guidelines of CVC.

7.0 Action on complaints :-

7.1 Signed complaints

Such complaints shall be processed as mentioned in the policy.

7.2 Anonymous and Pseudonymous complaints :-

Anonymous and pseudonymous complaints could be misused by

disgruntled elements to harass honest officials. The CVC has, therefore,
advised that no action is to be taken, as a general rule, on anonymous /
pseudonymous complaints received. Although anonymous /
pseudonymous complaints should normally be dropped, the CVC has not
precluded itself from taking any cognizance of any complaint on which
action is warranted. The CVC has also advised that if such complaints
apparently contain verifiable information and the department /
organisation proposes to look into the verifiable facts alleged in such
complaints, a verification may be carried out and on completion of the
verification, if it is considered that a detail investigation is called for, then
the prior approval of the CVC is necessary to take up investigation.
(Clause 3.8.1 & 3.8.2 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual 2005, Circular no.
3(v)/99/2 dated 29th June, 1999, 98/DSP/9 dated 31st January 2002, 98/DSP/9
dated 11th October, 2002, 98/DSP/9 dated 13th August, 2003 and 006/VGL/065
dated 6th July, 2006).

7.3 Source information

The complaint shall be treated as signed complaint and processed as

mentioned in the policy.

8.0 Action on complaints referred by the CVC :-

8.1 In case, the complaint does not attract vigilance angle, or the issue is of
petty nature, the CVC forwards such complaints for necessary action, to
redress the grievances of the complainant. The action taken report on
these complaints is not required to be sent to the CVC for further advice,
until and unless something more serious is brought out subsequently.

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 6

 A Maharatna Company

The complaint is to be disposed off by the departments / organizations

themselves after necessary action.
(CVC office order no. 16/03/04 dated 1st April, 2004)

8.2 Wherever the CVC calls for ‘action and report’ on a complaint, it is treated
as a signed complaint though on the face of the complaints, it may be
anonymous / pseudonymous. A Report has to be submitted to the CVC in
such cases for obtaining necessary advice of the CVC.

Wherever, the CVC calls for ‘investigation and report’ on a complaint, the
reports of the investigation should normally be sent to the CVC. However,
after the investigation, if it is found that the officials involved in the case
do not fall under the jurisdiction of the CVC the case need not be referred
to the CVC and may be dealt with by the CVO. In such cases, action
taken by the CVO may be intimated to the CVC in order to monitor
compliance. This dispensation does not apply to PIDPI complaints
forwarded by them.

(CVC office order no. 53/09/03 dated 23rd September, 2003, 16/03/04 dated 1st
April, 2004, 12/03/05 dated 16th March, 2005 and 03/01/10 dated 28th January,
2010).

8.3 Wherever, the CVC forwards a PIDPI complaint, such complaints are
treated as a signed complaint and the investigation report are submitted
to the CVC within a period of one month from the receipt of reference of
the CVC.

(CVC office order no. 38/6/2004 dated 8th June, 2004, 33/5/04 dated 17th May,
2004, 10/02/05 dated 10th March, 2005, 4/2/09 dated 27th February, 2009 and
9/5/09 dated 12th May, 2009).

9.0 Action on complaints under the purview of the

Administrative Ministry :-
9.1 Complaints against Board Level Officials are within the purview of the CVO
of the Administrative Ministry.

Where complaints against Boards Level Officials are received, the same
shall be forwarded to the CVO of the Ministry of Power. In case, the
Administrative Ministry calls for a report wherein the complaint is against
Board Level officials(s), a factual report shall be sent to the Ministry and
the copy of which shall be marked to the CVC.

9.3 At times, the complaints are forwarded by the Administrative Ministry for
report. In all such cases, the factual report shall be sent to the Ministry,
the copy of which shall also be endorsed to the CVC.

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 7

 A Maharatna Company

(CVC Office Order No. 25/4/05 dated 29th April, 2005 and 25/7/06 dated 6th July,
2006).

10.0 Processing of complaints :-

Checking the genuineness of the complainant by Vigilance Officers

10.1 The complainant needs to be contacted to verify the genuineness and also
to clarify the gaps in information since, at times, the complainant may not
be able to articulate the allegations properly. It is hence necessary that in
all complaints where contact details are provided, the complainant is
contacted, to verify the genuineness and also for additional information /
clarification that the complainant could provide. Further, all signed
complaints received from the complainant in person are to be
acknowledged.

Information received verbally will be reduced in writing

(Clause 1.2 of Chapter-II and Clause 3.8.1 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance

Manual 2005, CVC circular no. 3(v)/99/1 dated 21st June,. 1999).

10.2 All complaints received at Corporate Vigilance Office shall be entered in a

register maintained, for the purpose.

Only those complaints in which there is an allegation of corruption or

improper motive; or if the alleged facts prima facie indicate an element or
potentiality of a vigilance angle should be entered in the register for
verification.

(Clause 3.4.3 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual, 2005).

10.3 Project Vigilance

All complaints received by project vigilance shall be entered in a register

and addressed as under :-

a) All complaints shall be forwarded to Corporate Vigilance for further advice,

by indicating the type of complaint (whether signed, anonymous or
pseudonymous). Complaints in the local language shall be accompanied
by English/Hindi translation of the same.

b) In case complaint(s) are received wherein the complainant indicates that

the identity should not be revealed, such complaints alongwith the original
cover, should be forwarded directly to CVO, for further advice, by
superscribing the envelope ‘to be opened by addressee only’. Care is to

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 8

 A Maharatna Company

be taken by the Vigilance Head of the Project / Region not to reveal the
identity of the complainant.

10.4 Definition of Vigilance angle

Vigilance angle is obvious in the following acts:

(i) Demanding and/or accepting gratification other than legal

remuneration in respect of an officials act or for using his influence
with any other official.

(ii) Obtaining valuable thing, without consideration or with inadequate

consideration from a person with whom he has or likely to have official
dealings or his subordinates have official dealings or where he can
exert influence.

(iii) Obtaining for himself or for any other person any valuable thing or
pecuniary by corrupt or illegal means or by abusing his position as a
public servant.

(iv) Possession of assets disproportionate to his known source of income.

(v) Cases of misappropriation, forgery or cheating or other similar criminal

offences.

(vi) There are, however, other irregularities where circumstances will have
to be weighed carefully to take a view whether the officer’s integrity is
in doubt. Gross or willful negligence; recklessness in decision making;
blatant violations of systems and procedures; exercise of discretion in
excess, where no ostensible/public interest is evident; failure to keep
the controlling authority/superiors informed in the time- these are
some of the irregularities where the disciplinary authority with the help
of the CVO should carefully study the case and weigh the
circumstances to come to a conclusion whether there is reasonable
ground to doubt the integrity of the officer concerned.

(vii) Also, any undue/unjustified delay in the disposal of a case, perceived

after considering all relevant factors, would reinforce a conclusion as to
presence of Vigilance angle.

Commercial risk taking forms part of business. Therefore, every loss caused to
the organization, either in pecuniary or non-pecuniary terms, need not
necessarily become the subject matter of a Vigilance inquiry. Thus, whether a
person of common prudence, working within the ambit of the prescribed rules,
regulations and instruction, would have taken the decision in the prevailing

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 9

 A Maharatna Company

circumstances in the commercial/operational interests of the organization is one

possible criterion for determining the bona fides of the case. A positives response
to this question may indicate the existence of bona-fides. A negative reply, on
the other hand, might indicate their absence.

(Clause 1.6.1 of Chapter I of CVC Vigilance Manual, CVC Office Order No.23/04/04
dated13th April, 2004 and 74/12/05 dated 21st December,2005).

10.5 Processing of ‘Non-Vigilance’ Complaints

(a) Complaints, which relate to purely administrative matters or technical

lapses, such as late attendance, disobedience, insubordination,
negligence, lack of supervision or operational or technical irregularities,
etc., should not be entered in the register and should be dealt with
separately under ‘non-Vigilance complaints, in a separate register.

(Clause 3.4.3 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual,2005)

(b) The complaint is to be forwarded to the administrative department

concerned for disposal, in case the allegations are administrative in
nature and no vigilance angle is involved.

(Clause 3.6 and 3.7 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual, 2005)

(c) No action is necessary and the complaint shall be dropped and filed in
case the allegations are vague and general and are, pima facie,
unverifiable.

(Clause 3.5 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual, 2005)

(d) Wherever the Regional Vigilance Executive, on perusal of the

complaints referred at 10.5 (a to c) above, identifies the complaint to
be a ‘non-Vigilance Complaint’, the same shall be put up to CVO for
further advice. Further action shall be taken based on the advice of
CVO, and entries made in the register accordingly.

10.6 Processing of Complaints having Vigilance Angle

(a) In case it is a PIDPI complaint forwarded by the CVC, an investigation

shall be immediately called for since the investigation report is to be
submitted to the CVC within one month.

(b) The complaint may be forwarded to the Administrative Ministry

wherever the role of Board Level Officials has been alleged.

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 10

 A Maharatna Company

(c) In case there are no verifiable allegations constituting a Vigilance

Angle, a proposal may be submitted for dropping the complaint.

(d) In case there are verifiable allegations in the complaint attracting

vigilance angle, a proposal may be submitted for seeking a
verification/Investigation report.

(e) On receipt of any complaint containing allegations against any tender

in processing/decision stage, the tender process need not be stopped.
However, the allegation should be brought to the notice of the
Competent Authority, including the Purchase Committee, Tender
Committee, Negotiation Committee etc. The complaint should be
processed independently after final decision is taken by the Tender /
Purchase Committee and / or the Competent Authority
(CVC office order no. 25/7/06 dated 6th July, 2006)

(f) As a rule, complaints relating to the incidents which are more than 5
years old and no action has been taken till then, should not be
processed. However, the limit of 5 years will not apply to cases of
fraud and other criminal offences.

(g) No cognizance should be taken of any complaint which is received

within six months prior to the initiation of selection process for Board
level positions.

(CVC office Order No. 57/8/04 dated 31st August, 2004).

(h) Any other disposal action, based on the merits of the issues raised in
the complaint, the reasons of which shall be recorded.

On scrutinizing ‘Vigilance complaints’ entered in the register, Corporate Vigilance,

shall analyse the complaint, indicate the type of complaint (whether signed,
PIDPI, pseudonymous or anonymous) and shall submit a proposal to CVO and
deal the complaints, in accordance with provisions mentioned at 10.6.

(Clause 3.4.3, 3.6 & 3.7 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual 2005).

11.0 Time frame for verification :-

The time frame for verification of a complaint is one month.

As and when advised by CVO of a verification of the complaint, Corporate

Vigilance shall forward the complaint to the Vigilance Head of respective unit /
Region and seek a verification report within a month under intimation to the RVE
concerned.

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 11

 A Maharatna Company

In cases where the Vigilance Head of the respective unit / Region needs more
time to complete the verification, an interim reply should be sent to CVO
mentioning the reasons for the delay and the probable date for submission of the
verification report.

12.0 Format of Verification Report :-

The verification report should mention the complaint reference, allegations made
in the complaint, findings, observation on the merits of the complaint i.e.
whether allegations are true or not, the presence / absence of vigilance angle
and the conclusion.

13.0 Action on verification report :-

The RVE in Corporate vigilance on analyzing the findings of the verification report
submitted by the vigilance executive of the unit / region may be guided by the
following provisions of CVC while submitting the observations to CVO :

(a) To close the complaint, if there is no merit in the allegations made in the
complaint.

(b) To forward the findings to respective Departmental / Disciplinary

Authorities for necessary administrative action.

(c) To carry out a detailed investigation if the allegations are prime-facie true
and point towards a vigilance angle.

In case the allegations in the anonymous / pseudonymous complaint are

found to be true after verification, the consent of the CVC is mandatory in
case investigation is required to be done.

(Clause 3.8.1 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual, 2005 Clause 16.2 of CVC’s
Special Chapter on Vigilance Management in PSEs and CVC’s Office Order No.
25/7/06 dated 6th July, 2006).

Wherever verification has been called for under the belief that it is a
genuine signed complaint and it subsequently comes out that the
complaint is pseudonymous, the consent of the CVC is mandatory in case
investigation is required to be done

(Clause 3.8.4 of Chapter-III of CVC Vigilance Manual 2005)

(d) The complaint be referred to CBI, with the approval of CMD, if the
findings of the verification reveal that the allegations:

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 12

 A Maharatna Company

(i) are criminal in nature (e.g. bribery, corruption, forgery, criminal breach of
trust, possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income,
cheating, etc).; or

(ii) Require inquiries to be made from non-official persons; or

(iii) Involve examination of private records; or

(iv)Need expert police investigation for arriving at a conclusion; or

(v) Need investigation abroad.

(Clause 11.3.1 of CVC’s Special Chapter on Vigilance Management in PSEs)

Further action shall be taken based on the advice of CVO.

14.0 Time frame for Investigation :-

The time frame for carrying out a detailed Investigation is three months.

(Clause 4.13.1 of Chapter-IV of CVC Vigilance Manual 2005, Office Order no.000/VGL/18
dated 23rd May, 2000 and 20.05.10 dated 19th May, 2010).

As and when advised by CVO for an investigation, the RVE in Corporate Vigilance
shall seek a detailed investigation report from the Vigilance Executive of the
respective project / Region with a time frame of three months. Investigation
should be prioritized by keeping in view the date of superannuation of the
officials involved.

In cases where the Vigilance Executive of the respective project/Region needs

more time to complete the investigation, an interim reply should be sent to
CVO mentioning the reasons for the delay and the probable date for
submission of the investigation report.

15.0 Format of Investigation Report :-

Investigation report shall be exhaustive, relevant and structured so as to mention

the source, gist of allegations, facts, observations, response of the officials
concerned, counter to the response, conclusion, responsibility of officials,
recommendation for action and recommendation for systemic improvement, if
required.

16.0 Action on Investigation Report :-

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 13

 A Maharatna Company

16.1 The RVE in Corporate Vigilance on analyzing the findings of the

investigation report submitted by the Vigilance Executive of the
Unit/Region may be guided by the following provisions of CVC while
submitting the observations to CVO:

(a) Not to pursue the investigation any further if the irregularities are not
established.
(b) To recommend necessary action in case the irregularities are established.
The necessary action could be initiation of (i) disciplinary proceedings
against defaulting officials (ii) administrative action i.e.
Warning/Recordable Warning, Advisory Memo etc., and / or (iii) system
improvements.

16.2 While taking a final view on the investigation report, the following care
shall be taken:
(a) The advice of the CVC has to be sought in respect of all officials in the
jurisdiction of the CVC – Board level as well as two levels below the Board
level i.e. GM & above.

Such a reference would be required to be made even in respect of

executives who are not within the CVC’s jurisdiction, if they are involved
along with officers who are within the jurisdiction of the CVC, since the
case would then become a composite case and falls within the CVC’s
jurisdiction.

(b) The investigation report shall be forwarded to the CVO of the

Administrative Ministry (copy marked to the CVC) for further action, if
the investigation reveals the role of Board level officials.

Such a reference would be required to made even in respect of the

executives below Board level, if they are involved along with Board level
officials, since the case would then become a composite case and falls
within the jurisdiction of CVO of the Administrative Ministry.
The CVO of the Administrative Ministry will seek further advice from the
CVC.

(c) If the investigation reveals that the involved officials are below the level
of GM, the case will be generally dealt with by CVO for advice to the
concerned Disciplinary Authority.

(d) Wherever a major penalty is recommended, draft charge sheets have to

be enclosed while submitting the case to CVO/CVC for further advice.

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 14

 A Maharatna Company

(Clause 16.2 of CVC’s Special Chapter on Vigilance Management in PSEs, Office

Order no.NZ/PRC/01 dated 12th May, 2003, 12/02/04 dated 26th February, 2004,
12/3/05 dated 16th March, 2005, 30/5/05 dated 9th May, 2005, 14/3/06 dated
13th March, 2006, 34/09/07 dated 27th September, 2007, 21/08/09 dated 6th
August, 2009, 03.03.11 dated 11th March, 2011).

Further action shall be taken based on the advice of CVO/CVC, as the case
may be.

17.0 Action against persons making false complaints :-

Section 182 IPC provides for prosecution of a person making a false

complaint. Therefore, if a complaint against a public servant is found to
be malicious, vexatious or unfounded, serious action should be considered
against the complainant. Section 182 IPC reads as under :-

“Whoever gives to any public servant any information which he knows or

believes to be false intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely
that he will thereby cause, such public servant.

a) To do or omit anything which such public servant ought to do or omit if

the true state of facts respecting which such information is given were
known by him or ;

b) To use the lawful power of such public servant to the injury or annoyance
of any person;

Shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term

which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one
thousand rupees, or with both.”

Under Section 195(1) (e) Cr.P.C., a person making a false complaint can
be prosecuted on a complaint lodged with a court of competent
jurisdiction by the public servant to whom the false complaint was made
or by some other public servant to whom he is subordinate.

Alternatively, if the complainant is a public servant, it may also be

considered whether departmental action should be taken against him as
an alternative or in addition to prosecution.

(Clause 26 of the Special Chapter on Vigilance Management in PSEs)

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 15

 A Maharatna Company

References
S.N. Detail
1. CVC Vigilance Manual 2005
2. CVC Special Chapter on Vigilance Management in PSEs
3. CVC Office Order/ Circulars
No. Date Detail
st
(i) 3(v)/99/1 21 June, 1999 Complaint receipt
th
(ii) 3(v)/99/2 29 June, 1999 Anonymous/Pseudonymous
(iii) 3(v)/99/3 7th July, 1999 Special chapter
(iv) 98/DSP/9 31st January, 2002 Anonymous/Pseudonymous
(v) 98/DSP/9 11th October, 2002 Anonymous/Pseudonymous
(vi) NZ/PRC/01 12th May,2003 First Stage Advice (FSA)
(vii) 98/DSP/9 13th August, 2003 Anonymous/Pseudonymous
(viii) 53/09/03 23rd Sept., 2003 Anonymous/Pseudonymous
th
(ix) 12/02/04 26 February, 2004 FSA
(x) 16/03/04 1st April,2004 CVC referred complaints
(xi) 23/04/04 13th April,2004 Definition of Vigilance angle
th
(xii) 33/5/04 17 May, 2004 PIDPI
th
(xiii) 38/6/2004 8 June, 2004 PIDPI
st
(xiv) 57/8/04 31 August,2004 Time limits
(xv) 10/02/05 10th March,2005 PIDPI
(xvi) 25/04/05 29th April,2005 Complaints under purview of Administrative
Ministry
th
(xvii) 30/05/05 9 May,2005 FSA
(xviii) 74/12/05 21st December, Vigilance angle definition
2005
th
(xx) 14/3/06 13 March, 2006 FSA
(xxi) 34/09/07 27th September, FSA
2007
th
(xxii) 4/2/09 27 February, 2009 PIDPI
(xxiii) 9/5/09 12th May, 2009 PIDPI
th
(xxiv) 14/6/09 5 June, 2009 Standard Notice Board
st
(xxv) 15/07/09 1 July, 2009 Complaint Handling Policy
th
(xxvi) 21/08/09 6 August, 2009 FSA
(xxvii) 20/05/10 19th May, 2010 Time limits
th
(xxviii) 03/03/11 11 March, 2011 FSA
The above circulars can be downloaded from the link www.cvc.nic.in

COMPLAINT HANDLING POLICY 16