Coalgate: Ex-top bureaucrats back Parakh's accusation on PM

October 17, 2013

P_C_Parakh
New Delhi, Oct 17: Former top bureaucrats have come out in support of ex-Coal Secretary P C Parakh, who has been named by CBI in the coal blocks allocation scam, warning that harassment of honest officers will erode Government's credibility and stop senior officers from taking decisions.

"Parakh, as I have known him, is an honest, competent officer. While I do not wish to comment on the CBI investigation as such, as I do not have all the facts, I am at a loss to understand how an FIR has been filed only against him and no one in the PMO and no Minister," said E A S Sarma, former Coal Secretary.

If it is a case of conspiracy, all the conspirators should be taken into account. I hope there is no conspiracy!, said Sarma, a former IAS officer.

"I feel that investigations in such cases should be objective and uninfluenced by extraneous pressures. A clear distinction must be made between decisions taken in good faith and malafide decisions. It is unfortunate that dishonest Ministers, politicians and officers should be let off and honest officers harassed. It will only erode the credibility of the government which has already been on the decline in the recent times," he said.

Sarma said he has written to CVC on June 15 last year requesting it to initiate an investigation into the role of the PMO in the coalgate affair and three other scams.

"I reminded CVC at least two times after that. There has been no visible response from CVC on my letters," Sarma said.

Former Cabinet Secretary T S R Subramanian said such kind of action by CBI against Parakh will stop others from taking decisions.

"There are all kind of bureaucrats, good, bad, honest... There has to be a reasonable basis for any action by the agency," he said.

"According to the FIR, it was said Parakh met Kumar Mangalam Birla. As Cabinet Secretary, I used to meet ten bureaucrats, ten politicians and ten

businessmen daily. Should that mean that I be also made an accused?" he asked.

Parakh wanted the system to be changed for good, rued Subramanian. The former Cabinet Secretary also felt that there was an "ulterior motive" behind the move to name Parakh as an accused.

"If he has been made an accused, he could be crippled as a witness. There could be an ulterior motive," he said.

Former Central Vigilance Commissioner N Vittal accused CBI of not following its charter. "It is utterly unfair and incompetent on part of CBI (to name Parakh). They are not following their charter. I condemn CBI's action," he said.

"I have known Parakh. He is an honest person and has a good reputation," Vittal said.

The former CVC said going by CBI's logic as a minister in charge of coal ministry, Prime Minister should be held responsible for taking any decision on the matter.

Former IAS officer G Sundaram also condemned CBI's action. "I do not know him (Parakh). People who know him say he is an honest officer. But going by the charges, Prime Minister and senior officials in the PMO should also be named as the final decision was taken by them only," he said.

CBI has registered a case against Parakh and industrialist Kumar Mangalam Birla on charges of criminal conspiracy and corruption in connection with alleged irregularities in the allocation of two coal blocks in Odisha in 2005.

Parakh has dubbed as "baseless" allegations levelled against him by the CBI.

"There is absolutely nothing wrong with the decision. It was a very fair and correct decision that we took. I don't know why CBI thought that there is a conspiracy," Parakh has said.

"But, if there is a conspiracy, then there are different members in this conspiracy. There is K M Birla who made the representation, he is one conspirator. I, who examined the case and made a recommendation, I can be another conspirator and the Prime Minister, who as the Coal Minister, took the final decision, is the third conspirator.

"So, if the CBI thinks there is a conspiracy, why did they choose and select Mr Birla and me and not the PM. If conspiracy is there, then everyone is part of the conspiracy," he contended.

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 12,2024

ikramuddinkamil.jpg

The Taliban regime has appointed Ikramuddin Kamil as the acting consul in the Afghan mission in Mumbai, Afghan media has reported.

It is the first such appointment made by the Taliban set up to any Afghan mission in India.

There was no immediate comment from the Indian side on the appointment that came.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan has announced the appointment of Kamil as the acting consul in Mumbai, the Taliban-controlled Bakhtar News Agency reported on Monday, citing unnamed sources.

"He is currently in Mumbai, where he is fulfilling his duties as a diplomat representing the Islamic Emirate," it said.

The appointment is part of Kabul's efforts to strengthen diplomatic ties with India and enhance its presence abroad, the media outlet said

Kamil holds a PhD degree in international law and previously served as the deputy director in the department of security cooperation and border affairs in the foreign ministry, it said.

He is expected to facilitate consular services and represent the interests of Afghanistan in India, the report added.

Kamil's appointment comes days after the external affairs ministry's point-person for Afghanistan held talks with the Taliban's acting defence minister, Mullah Mohammad Yaqoob, in Kabul.

Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's deputy foreign minister for political affairs, also posted on X about Kamil's appointment.

The appointment of Kamil is seen as part of efforts to facilitate consular services to the Afghan population in Mumbai.

There has been almost negligible presence of diplomatic staff at the Afghan missions in India.

Most of the diplomats appointed by the Ashraf Ghani government have already left India.

In May, Zakia Wardak, the seniormost Afghan diplomat in India, resigned from her position after reports emerged that she was caught at the Mumbai airport for allegedly trying to smuggle 25 kg of gold worth Rs 18.6 crore from Dubai.

Wardak had taken charge as the acting ambassador of Afghanistan to New Delhi late last year, after working as the Afghan consul general in Mumbai for more than two years.

She took charge of the Afghan embassy in New Delhi last November, after the mission helmed by then ambassador Farid Mamundzay announced its closure.

Mamundzay, who was an appointee of the Ghani government, had moved to the United Kingdom.

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 15,2024

amitshah.jpg

Union minister Amit Shah on Friday, November 15, said PM Narendra Modi will amend the Waqf Act despite opposition from leaders like Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar.

"Modi ji wants to change the Waqf Board law, but Uddhav ji, Sharad Pawar and Supriya Sule are opposing it," Shah said, addressing a rally at Umarkhed in Maharashtra's Yavatmal district.

"Uddhav ji, listen carefully, you all can protest as much as you want, but Modi ji will amend the Waqf Act," he said. Shah said there are two camps in the November 20 Maharashtra assembly polls, one of 'Pandavas' represented by the BJP-led Mahayuti and the other of 'Kauravas' represented by Maha Vikas Aghadi.

"Uddhav Thackeray claims that his Shiv Sena is the real one. Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Aurangabad to Sambhajinagar? Can the real Shiv Sena go against renaming Ahmednagar to Ahilyanagar? The real Shiv Sena stands with the BJP," Shah said.

"Rahul Baba used to say that his government would credit money in the accounts of the people instantly. You were unable to fulfil your promises in Himachal, Karnataka, and Telangana," he said.

Shah said the Mahayuti alliance has promised that women will get Rs 2,100 per month under the Ladki Bahin Yojana. "Kashmir is an integral part of India and no power in the world can snatch it away from us," Shah said.

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.