Nair concealed facts from Cabinet on Antrix deal: CAG

May 16, 2012

Nair
New Delhi, May 16: Things have got tougher for the former Secretary of the Department of Space and former ISRO Chairman, G. Madhavan Nair, with the Comptroller and Auditor-General also finding fault with the way the Space Department, under his stewardship, went about the deal between ISRO's Antrix Corporation and the Bangalore-based private firm, Devas Multimedia.

Calling the Antrix-Devas agreement a “classic case of public investment for private profit,” the CAG, in a report tabled in Parliament on Tuesday, noted that Mr. Nair failed to convene meetings of the INSAT Coordination Committee as its Chairman and as a result, the concerns of key stakeholders, represented through the Secretaries of different Ministries and Departments, were “effectively blocked off” in the decision-making process.

“The Department of Space [under Mr. Nair], in its eagerness, went beyond its remit as laid down in the Allocation of Business Rules [of the government], concealed facts from the Union Cabinet and violated numerous rules, policies, and procedures.”

The department took upon itself the task of approving the new hybrid S-band DMB service, which, as in the case of DTH services, was the prerogative of the Union Cabinet. “Valuable spectrum frequencies, including 10 MHz, were to be reserved for strategic purposes, [but] were earmarked for Devas without obtaining approval of the Wireless Planning and Coordination [WPC] wing of the DoT [Department of Telecommunication].”

Likewise, the report noted, the Space Department had “suppressed” the crucial fact that it had already signed an agreement with Devas, while seeking Cabinet approval for the launch of the GSAT-6 satellite, and also failed to inform the Cabinet that GSAT-6 and 6 A satellites, proposed to be funded from the government budget, were to be used almost entirely by a private commercial entity.

“To avoid the obtaining of approval of the Cabinet, the DoS [Department of Space] estimated the cost of GSAT-6A, the subsequent satellite of a similar configuration after GSAT-6, at Rs. 147 crore so that it fell within the financial competence of the Space Commission [though] the first GSAT-6 satellite had been costed at Rs. 269 crore.”

It also complained that Devas was extended a host of benefits to promote the interests of the U.S.-based private consultancy firm, Forge Advisors, which had set up Devas, including earmarking for it 70 MHz of S-band spectrum for an indefinite period of time, ignoring its revenue potential to the government.

“Subsequent events like the auction of 3G in which the government received Rs. 67,719 crore and the auction of Broadband Wireless Access where the government received Rs. 38,543 crore revealed that the possibility of obtaining commensurate amounts for providing this commercial service was never explored.”

The Antrix-Devas pact also “cherry-picked” from two different models in a way that it extended maximum benefits to Devas, the report said and complained that the Space Department “further went on to revise the contract to ‘reassure the investors' so that even before engaging in any trading, manufacturing ground segment development activity and rolling out of any service, it could raise Rs. 575.6 crore from foreign investors.”

Noting that there was need for the government to ensure that there was no conflict of interest so that fundamental integrity of decisions, departments and the government was not undermined, the CAG said that in the case of the Space Department such an issue was evident in the multiple roles exercised by Mr. Nair.

“As Chairman, ISRO, he appointed the Shankara Committee to examine the proposals of Forge Advisors. As Secretary, Department of Space, he submitted a note to the Cabinet, in which critical facts were concealed. As Chairman, Space Commission, he chaired meetings where approval to GSAT-6 and 6A were accorded.”

The CAG noted “the public interest and those of the government were sacrificed to favour a private consultancy firm, which was promoted by Sh D. Venugopal and Sh. M.G. Chandrasekhar, retired employees of the ISRO.”

“The Antrix-Devas deal,” it said, “is a classic instance of failure of the governance structure in which selected individuals, some serving and some retired public servants, were able to successfully propel the agenda of a private entity by arrogating unto themselves powers which they were not legitimately authorised to exercise.”

It also pointed out that “in the parliamentary system of government, the Cabinet has a role of centrality in the exercise of executive power. The fact that a group of individuals was able to conceal facts and side-step the Cabinet is a testimony to the extent of abuse of the trust reposed in them. This needs to be addressed.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 11,2024

birensingh.jpg

The Manipur Kuki MLAs have released a statement calling out Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's 'lies' in the Supreme Court. In a joint statement, the MLAs, including those from the Bharatiya Janata Party, said they had not had any meeting with the Chief Minister since May 3, 2023, nor did they intend to meet him in the future as “he was the mastermind behind the violence”.

As per the MLAs, the SG lied about state CM N Biren Singh speaking to Kuki MLAs to control the situation there, in order to halt a Supreme Court probe into the leaked tapes which allege that Singh has been complicit in the violence that broke out between Kukis and Meitis there.

"We...clarify that we have never had any meeting with Chief Minister, Shri N. Biren Singh since May 3, 2023, nor have any intention to meet him in future as he is the mastermind behind the violence and ethnic cleansing of our people from the Imphal valley, which is continuing till today, the latest being the brutal killing and burning of Mrs Zosangkim Hmar on November 7, 2024," the letter read, while condemning the recent 'barbaric' killing of the woman there, and noting the SG's assertion is 'tantamount' to misleading the top court.

“We, the undersigned ten MLAs, have come to know that during the Supreme Court hearing held on November 8, 2024, the Solicitor General of India submitted that ‘CM is meeting all Kuki MLAs and trying to bring the situation down to get peace’. In this connection, we hereby categorically state that this submission is a blatant lie and tantamount to misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,” the statement said.

The Supreme Court, while hearing a petition by a Kuki organisation, asked that it submit audio tapes to substantiate its claim that the Chief Minister was instrumental in inciting and organising violence in the northeastern State.

Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta orally informed the court that the Chief Minister was meeting all the Kuki-Zo MLAs and that peace in the State had come at a huge cost.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 21,2024

adani.jpg

Shares of Adani Group companies lost about $28 billion in market value in morning trade on Thursday after US prosecutors charged the billionaire chairman of the Indian conglomerate in an alleged bribery and fraud scheme.

Gautam Adani's flagship company Adani Enterprises tumbled 23 per cent, while Adani Ports, Adani Total Gas, Adani Green, Adani Power, Adani Wilmar and Adani Energy Solutions, ACC , Ambuja Cements and NDTV fell between 20 per cent and 90 per cent.

Adani group's 10 listed stocks had a total market capitalisation of about $141 billion at 0534 GMT, compared to $169.08 billion on Tuesday.

US authorities said Adani and seven other defendants, including his nephew Sagar Adani, agreed to pay about $265 million in bribes to Indian government officials to obtain contracts expected to yield $2 billion of profit over 20 years, and develop India's largest solar power plant project.

Adani Green in a statement on Thursday said the US Justice Department had issued a criminal indictment against board members Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani and the Securities and Exchange Commission had issued a civil complaint against them.

The US Justice Department also included Adani Green board member Vneet Jaain in the criminal indictment, it said.

Adani Green's units had decided not to proceed with the proposed US dollar denominated bond offerings due to developments, it added.

"Investors will shy away from Adani Group stocks ... and that's what this sharp selling is signifying," said Saurabh Jain, assistant vice president of retail equities research at SMC Global Securities.

"This could hurt the credibility of the group and maybe borrowing costs will rise," he said.

The indictment comes nearly two years after US shortseller Hindenburg Research alleged that Adani had improperly used tax havens and was involved in stock manipulation, allegations the conglomerate denied.

Also in early Asian trading on Thursday, Adani dollar bonds slumped, with prices down 3c-5c on bonds for Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone. The falls were the largest since the Adani Group came under a short-seller attack in February 2023.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.