Calcutta, Dec. 16 :    Calcutta, Dec. 16:  Emboldened by chief minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee's tough measures for restoring work ethics in the administration, the state public service commission has drawn his attention to the rampant irregularities in government appointments. These cases of irregular appointments had been placed at the first Cabinet meeting presided by Bhattacharjee earlier this month. The chief minister had later said: 'There is no question of suppressing the matter. We shall place the commission's report during the budget session of the Assembly and if there is any discussion, we are ready to reply. Corruption must be rooted out.' Sources said that the commission's report, placed before the chief minister last week, has identified a number of departments that have made irregular appointments. They are: higher education, prisons, health, police, commerce and industries and information and cultural affairs. Bhattacharjee was in charge of the police and information and cultural affairs departments when such irregularities were committed. In most cases, senior officers are accused of offering 'special favours' to their 'chosen ones', flouting all norms and procedures laid down by the public service commission. The appointment of the director of the state finger print bureau is a glaring example. The home department had sent a proposal to the public service commission for promoting one officer in the bureau to the top post. But the commission, after scrutinising service records of eligible officers, found another person suitable for the job. However, the commission's recommendations could not be accepted by the home department as it had already appointed its nominee without consulting it. As the decision went against the commission's regulations of 1955, it treated this appointment as irregular. The home department tried to cover up the irregularity by arguing that appointment was just a 'local arrangement' and the nominee had not been formally appointed. He had been given powers and authority but not the salary, for the top post, said the department in its defence. While examining proposals for the appointment of personal assistants to the inspector-general (prisons), the commission discovered that the post of a manager in the jail department's outlet for consumer goods had been filled up without its knowledge. When the commission asked for an explanation, the jail department expressed its regret saying that such mistakes will not recur. In June 1995, the higher education department had informed the commission that it had appointed a personal assistant to the director for technical education in 1992 without prior sanction of the commission. As no ad hoc appointment is effective for more than six months, the commission treated it as irregular and asked the incumbent to step down. The order put the higher education department in a spot as the person concerned had retired in 1996 after drawing salary and perks for the post. The commerce and industries department had promoted a junior officer to the post of assistant superintendent in the government press at Narkeldanga Main Road in Calcutta. When the commission objected to such an irregular appointment, the department said: 'Objections made by the commission have been noted for future guidance.' Almost similar reply was given by the health department when it was found that 10 posts of principal and lecturers were filled up in the Institute of Pharmacy on ad hoc basis over a period of four years from 1986. The department simply said: 'Sorry.'