Friday, March 19, 2010

new delhi corridor gossips

Attn  Editor VAARTHA  Hyd




NEW DELHI POLITICAL GRAPEVINE SNIPPETS
for publication on  March 2 0, 2010

Thanks
R Rajagopalan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PMO is busy preparing 6th volume of "Report to the People"
a detailed compendium of the progress of the first year of UPA2 
PMO has given this book let for printing, soon after the Parliament is 
adjourned in second half of May 2010 PM is keen to hold a press conference
on this report. Usually PM Dr Manmohan Singh holds a Dinner get-to-gether.
But May 2010 advisers to PMO impressed upon Dr Manmohan Singh to hold
a Press Conference in Vigyan Bhavan 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1984 and 1987 Sikh and LTTE militancy are now haunting the security agencies.
Sikh militants in Canada and Britan are in close touch with ISI to revive 
terrorism in Punjab. Ground reality in Punjab is also reflecting the mindset
of North Block. Similarly the spy personnel in deep southern districts of 
Tamil Nadu are sending alarming details of revival of LTTE activities.
But effective handling of two major operations of cleansing militancy
then as a Junior Minister the present Cabinet Minister in Home Ministry
if too confident of crushing them in two states.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DMK chief Minister Karunanidhi won the hearts of Biharis by hosting 
thanks giving mass Lunch for the construction labourers who built 
new Tamil Nadu Assembly. BJP leaders especially Ravi Shankar Prasad
and Lalu Prasad praised 86 year old Karunanidhi. Not only this. Ravi Shankar
Prasad is known as a closely known to  AIADMK Jayalalitha also commented that
in one shot Karunanidhi won two political rivals. Proved Chennai will welcome
Biharis unlike Raj Thackrey MNS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sardar Devender Sandhu an Indian Railways Traffice Service officer attached to 
Prime Minister Office as Director , has an innovative style of extending warm hospitality
to his guests. Prepares hot coffee by himself.standing before
a vending coffee machine, Impressed by his gesture,many visitors record their 
appreciation. At times seniors in PMO drop in  to enjoy a cup of coffee with him.
Sandhu presence is felt in the entire ground floor corridor  with the fragrance of coffee.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ends

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

CAT REINSTATES DISMISSED RAW LADY OFFICER

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH

OA 50/2010

New Delhi, this the 16th day of March, 2010

Hon ble Mr. Justice M. Ramachandran, Vice Chairman (J)
Hon ble Mr. N.D. Dayal, Member (A)

Nisha Priya Bhatia,
D/o Shri T.N. Bhatia,
R/o I-263, Naraina,
New Delhi-110028. Applicant.

(Applicant in person)

Versus

1. Secretary (PG& Coordination),
Cabinet Secretariat,
Rashtrapati Bhawan,
New Delhi.

2. Secretary (R),
Cabinet Secretariat,
Research & Analysis Wing,
Room No.7, Bikaner House Annexe,
Shahjahan Road,
New Delhi-110011. Respondents.

 (By Advocate Mr. T.C. Gupta)

O R D E R
M. Ramachandran, Vice Chairman (J).

Cabinet Secretariat of Govt. of India on 18.12.2009 had issued an order, released under the signature of Additional Secretary, whereby the applicant was informed that she stands compulsorily retired from service.  This is under challenge.  Applicant was working during the relevant time as a Director, in the Research & Analysis Wing (R&AW) of the Central Government.   The order, inter alia, proclaimed the power of the Government, reserved under Rule 135 (1)(a) of the R&AW (Recruitment, Cadre & Service) Rules which authorized them to compulsorily retire any officer of the organization, on the ground of being exposed as an intelligence officer or his becoming unemployable in the Organization, for reasons of security.  It had been disclosed that the competent authority was satisfied that the conditions for invoking provisions of Rule 135 in respect of the applicant existed and, therefore, invoking the authority supplied by the said Rule, she was, with immediate effect, being compulsorily retired.

2. According to the applicant, it was a thoroughly motivated step, actuated by spite as well as malafides, and issued in total negation of fair play.  Her legal rights have been violated.  Rule 135 (1) (a) of the R&AW (Recruitment, Cadre and Service) Rules did not authorize such arbitrary steps.  In the Original Application, she has chartered the events and circumstances which, according to her, possibly might have led to the finale.  On the other hand, the Government, however, had strongly contended that taking stock of the ill will that was uninterruptedly being precipitated, a bonafide decision, a authorized by the Rule had been taken.  The subtle suggestion is that in fact Government was driven to the wall and forced to resort to extreme steps.   What was paramount was the security of the country, and the order could neither have been characterized as punitive nor equated with a punishment.  Bitter medicine indeed was required to be administered to get round chronic ill health.

3. The applicant had attempted to elucidate the background in which her relations with her superior officers turned sour.  She also referred to the incidents which inflamed the situation, and according to her, these were the reasons which led to the order.  We feel it may not be necessary for us to unduly travel to those regions but only reference may be made to the events.  Applicant refers to her representations dated 26.10.2007 and 16.6.2008 on the subject of sexual exploitation of women employees in the R&AW and there she had lamented about the indifference and indeed involvement of the Secretary.  She had therein adverted to the `prostitution rackets running from her office premises/safe houses through use of secret service funds .  It is her case that her seniors wished her to be a part of these. Sly comments and indecent and objectionable suggestions had followed.  The applicant had lodged complaints about sexual harassment, but it was attempted to be sidelined.  Thereupon she had been targeted.

4. According to the applicant, she had been approaching the Supreme Court, High Court and Subordinate Courts.  Some of the cases have been disposed of and a few are even now pending.  It is asserted that her pursuit to get justice and to safeguard her self respect ultimately had led to an accusation that her presence in the organization was a threat to the security of the country.  It was nothing but abuse of power.  For this reason she has been eased out.

5. She argued that it may be altogether different that a person who is relieved by invoking powers under Rule 135 (1)(a) may be better off than persons who go out from other services in matters of receipt of pensionary benefits, but it is irrelevant.  The termination continues to be stigmatic.  Constitution of India being supreme, she could not have been denied protection of Constitution.  The Subsidiary Rules if it attempted to override her fundamental rights, required to be ignored.  The protection guaranteed to a civil servant by Article 311 could not have been set at naught by the exercise carried out.  

6. The applicant, appearing in person referred to the prejudice that had befallen on herself and members of her family.  She submitted that the social stigma cast on her was unbearable, and these threatened her very right to life.  She had an outstanding record of service spanning about two decades, and even during the period of turbulence, her devotion to work was not doubted.  The reporting officer had recorded her ACR as outstanding, but the reviewing authority had unjustly toned it down, to her detriment.   That was understandable.  The social ostricisation had the effect of wrecking her family.  Overlooking all relevant aspects most whimsically a decision had been taken, behind her back.  This was unethical, illegal and a colourable exercise of executive power.

7. Applicant also submitted that the order is vague as vagueness can be possible.  Under Rule 135 (1)(a) of the Rules, compulsory retirement was authorized to be prescribed, for two reasons.  One is on the ground of being exposed, as an intelligence officer.  It can be resorted to also for reasons of security, namely, that a person could become unemployable in the organization.  The two circumstances were altogether different.  But the order was cryptic and did not pinpoint the real reasons for arriving at the decision.  For the said reason alone it deserved to be quashed.

8. The further contention raised was about the attempt to preserve the secrecy in the transactions.  When the rules were formulated in exercise of subsidiary legislative process, it could not be kept in lockers.  The Rules were out of bound to the officers of the organization, as well as the general public.  But nevertheless it had been invoked.   She submits that reference to the rule in the impugned order was difficult for comprehension.  Only when a request was made for clarification, extracts of Rule 135 (1)(a) had been forwarded in a letter with a warning that it was not expected of her to make it public.   Applicant contended that when the policy of the Government was to introduce transparency in governance itself, the Respondents were behaving strangely.  After the advent of the Right to Information Act, the officers of the R&AW were clearly in error in sticking on to draconian procedure even insisting that the service rules governing the officers will not be disclosed to them and were to be under lock and key.  When the RTI Act admittedly had supremacy and was to operate notwithstanding any other orders, statues or rules, to continue with age old practices were obsessive.  This required to be condemned.  It is suggested that on a plea of secrecy, the top officers of the Department were reserving for themselves license to do whatever they felt convenient, splurging funds, as if answerable to none.   In the course, they wrecked the career of honest and disciplined officers.  She was an officer entitled to the protection of Article 311 of the Constitution.  Her service was governed by the CCS (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules.  Therefore, the compulsory retirement as meted out was the height of arbitrariness.  The Tribunal should not have, according to her, overlooked the plight of a civil servant and a citizen of the country, of being subjected to the abyss of misery, penury, and, simultaneously branding her as untouchable.  According to applicant, the impugned order is immature, experimental and apparently taken all of a sudden, completely contrary to the stand earlier disclosed before the Tribunal.  It had been undertaken that the applicant would be appropriately rehabilitated, once the turmoil settled.  But they did not honour the commitment.   Therefore, the prayer made is to set aside the order of compulsory retirement, with consequential reliefs to be extended.

9. Mr. T.C. Gupta, senior standing counsel, on the other hand, justified the order.  He submitted that the Government had inherent powers to dispense with the services of a civil servant, when it came to their notice that the continuance of an officer would have been a threat to security of the State.  It is further submitted that there is no issue of stigma as alleged, and the right of the Government to retire a person prematurely has been recognized.  The impugned proceedings are really not justiciable.  Article 311 (2) (c) of the Constitution recognizes this position and Rule 135 (1)(a) of R&AW (Recruitment, Cadre and Service) Rules has been drafted in line therewith.  Supervening rights are enjoyed by the Government.   Going by the text of the impugned order, Mr. Gupta would further contend that both the limbs of the order had been satisfied.  It was a case where the applicant had exposed herself as an intelligence officer and by her conduct over a period she had made it clear that she has become unemployable in the organization.   The association of a person with R&AW required to be maintained as a closely guarded secret, and once it came to be made public, the officer was to have no more place in the organization.  It was on the mandate of the Rule.  The functions expected to be discharged by an officer of R&AW were highly sensitive; the assignments were for safeguarding the security of the State, and once an officer throws caution to the winds, it was sufficient reason to cut off the relations with him.   It may be unpleasant, but in the larger interests that could not have been avoided.

10. Counsel submits that the order could not have been characterized as a penalty.  There was no liability, therefore, for the Government to comply with procedural formalities, prescribed for dealing with an ordinary case where the officer might have committed misconduct.  No formal charge sheet was envisaged, nor a show cause notice or inquiry necessary.  The Rule empowering the Government to take such actions also has not been specifically challenged.

11. Mr. Gupta also submitted that simultaneously Department were also not unmindful of the hardships.  A person, who is retired, would be deemed as having continued to serve for his entire length of service upto the age of superannuation for purposes of pension.  It would have been on the basis of the notional pay that would have been drawn by the officer, and also taking notice of the promotions that he would have normally received.   The benefits of DCRG and family pension and a liberal grant could have been admissible to the individual so that he may not have any financial difficulties during post retirement life.  Therefore, it could have been more reasonable to consider the provision as a tool to tackle the situation where an officer was not to be allowed to function any more for reasons of security of the Organization/Nation..

12. It was further submitted that the allegations of malafides or presence of extraneous reasons for prescribing retirement had, in fact, no basis whatsoever.  Of course, the applicant had alleged about the sexual exploitation a couple of years back.  With promptitude, the allegations had been inquired into by independent Inquiry Committees.  Their report was that there was no subsistence in the allegations.   Applicant never had been subjected to any sexual harassment while she was in the organization.  On the other hand, there were a series of acts on her part which exposed her to be an officer of the intelligence organization and that too an unreliable person.  There could not have been any compromise on the issue; viz that in the organization the officers and staff were to serve in absolute anonymity.

13. The counter reply also referred to certain incidents, Mr. Gupta suggesting that these may be indices of the mental frame of the applicant.  The applicant had attempted to commit suicide in the office premises of the Prime Minister of India on 19.08.2008.  At that time she had exposed herself to be an officer of he intelligence community.  The above incident had received wide publicity in the print media.  Her photographs were splashed and she had also given live interview presenting herself before the visual media.

14. The thrust of the Respondent, again was on the conduct of the employee forfeiting the confidence reposed in her. Another circumstance cited against the applicant was that while at the Supreme Court s corridor on 27.07.2009, she tore off her clothes and was at that time forcibly taken away by security personnel.  On 26.11.2009, likewise, at the premises of the Central Administrative Tribunal, she had launched an abusive tirade against the officers and Government counsel present in the court room.  On that day, she had tried to commit suicide by jumping from the second floor of the building.  She was oblivious that she was not to expose herself, and was to avoid publicity.  Dealing with the argument of the applicant that reports in respect of several other officers of the organization appeared routinely, in the newspapers, but no action was ever taken, Mr. Gupta submitted that the stray incidents of investigative journalism relating to certain R&AW officers were to be viewed from a different angle.  According to him, definitely, the applicant could not have compared herself with such officers as he circumstances in which the exposure had happened were totally dissimilar.  The overt indisciplined behaviour spanning over a period of two years was too serious to be overlooked.  It was only after a mature reasoning, the competent authority, the Prime Minister, had decided to retire her from service.    Counsel reiterated that the import of principles of natural justice, nor the constitutional protection or the protection of the service rules could not have been possible to be availed of as the facts of the case were unique, distinct, and a power had been exercised, with due deference to the rules and ultimately in the interest and security of the State.   The application was to be treated as misconceived.

15. We had gone through the materials that had been placed by the parties.  After hearing them, we are of the confirmed opinion that the applicant has been treated with a large doze of arbitrariness and her statutory as well as constitutional rights stand violated.  Resort to Rule 135 (1)(a) could not have been supported.  Resultantly, we are of the view that the applicant is entitled to the reliefs as might be admissible, namely, reinstatement.   We may give below our reasons fro coming to the said conclusion.

16. The Research and Analysis Wing indeed is a specialized organization.  An extraordinary amount of discipline is expected and required to be maintained by the inmates of the organization taking note of the nature of the multifarious pursuits and activities that might have been within their exclusive purview, especially pertaining to the security of the Nation.   However, the rigidity and outlook should not be static for all time to come.  It is expected that they update their approach in tune with change in times.  The Right to Information Act has percolated to every nook and corner of Governmental activities now.  It may be difficult to accept now a proposition that rigid secrecy should be there shrouded in all the matters and transactions pertaining to the special service.  For instance, it is possible to assume from materials produced here that anonymity of personnel of R&AW is more a myth than reality.  Documents have been provided by the applicant, being excerpts and newspaper clippings, giving details of its officers.  We may even take notice of an article published in a widely circulated English Weekly, The Week, dated 07.03.2010.  It is captioned as Raw Deal rather pregnant with meaning.   Two paragraphs from the article could be extracted below:

The discontent started brewing when A.B. Mathur, a 1975-batch IPS officer from the Intelligence Bureau, was inducted into the agency on deputation and promoted as special secretary on August 6, 2009, superseding six additional secretaries P.N. Heblikar, C.K. Sinha, B.G. Rawal, A.K. Arni (1973 batch), and Sharad Kumar and Ashok Kapoor (1975 batch).  Sources say the appointment committee of the Cabinet Secretariat promoted Mathur on the presumption that all senior officers had been promoted

Dissatisfaction among officers on promotions has always been an issue in secret service agencies.  The most recent being K.C. Verma s appointment as secretary after Ashok Chaturvedi retired in Janaury 2009, even as three officers  - P.V. Kumar (1971 batch direct recruit), Rana Bannerjee (1970 batch IAS officer) and S.K. Tripathi (1971 batch IPS officer) were in the queue.


17. It cannot at all be the case of the respondents that all of them are likely to be disassociated from the R&AW for this reason.  The more acceptable version indeed comes from the pleadings in the OA, namely,  that after about 10 to 12 years of assignments, around the world, any persons Indian or foreigner interested in the intelligence work come to know who is who, if they are worth their salt.  Therefore, a summary discharge on such an empty plea really amounts to self denial.  The provision may be remaining in the statute book rather as a relic of outdated theories.

18. The applicant is also justified in pointing out that the Right to Information Act has brought a sea change of the scene.  Only such matters which are specifically classified are matters not to be disclosed on queries.  Every other details, including the method of functioning of the Government, are required to be let known to public, if application forth comes.   We are surprised to notice that the applicant was required to keep to herself the text of the Rule (Rule 135) when it had been supplied to her.  This is the basic rule, which, according to the respondents, empowered them to take action against her.  This is far too difficult to be countenanced.  Transparency should have been there in respect of all other details as well as inputs, which led the competent authority to come to a decision that the applicant had to be separated from the organization.   The discussions as above lead us to an assumption that the treatment meted out was arbitrary.  Further, the expressions in the rule are loosely worded.  `For reasons of Security is beyond definition, rather tricky, and capable of being put to surreptitious use.

19. Of course, in the counter reply filed, ancillary and supplemental circumstances which had prompted the competent authority to come to a decision for compulsorily retiring the applicant has been stated.  But we find that it lacks conviction especially with reference to their chronological sequences.  We are constrained to advert to a fact, which might be highly relevant in this context.  As referred to earlier, the applicant had occasion to file applications before different fora.  One such petition is OA 2687/2008.  MA 1089/2009 had come to be filed by the applicant in the said OA challenging her new posting, on the ground that she is shifted to a cadre inferior to the executive cadre to which she actually belongs.  While disposing of an interlocutory application (MA 1089/2009), on 26.11.2009, the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents was specifically noticed that there was no move to change the cadre of the applicant (on a regular basis).  Reference had been made by the Bench at that time to the specific admission made in paragraph 4 of the affidavit on record.     The Bench at that time had further observed (Paragraph 3 of the order) as following:
The learned counsel has further stated that the Respondents would consider re-posting the Applicant back to the Executive Cadre after six months when the tempers have cooled down.

Therefore, the MA filed was disposed of, the Bench observing as following:
..we are of the view that there is no need for us to interfere in the posting of the Applicant made by the Competent Authority.

But the impugned order has been issued a few days thereafter, namely, on 18.12.2009.  It must be noticed that there was hardly time for making deliberations for coming to a conclusion that the applicant became unsuitable to continue in the organization.  Even while making the submission before the Bench in MA 1089/2009, the incident as about the applicant exposing herself, during the year 2008-09, was very much there in the knowledge of the respondent.  As on the hearing date at least there was no intention to retire her if we go by he submissions made before the Tribunal.  But after making a concession before the judicial forum that appropriate posting will be given after few months, it cannot be recognized as in good taste to determine that she was fit only to go for a compulsory retirement.  No reference to any fresh materials which had cropped up between the brief period viz the date of the order of this Tribunal in MA 1089/2009 and the date when she was axed is given.  This, we feel, will be a very crucial circumstance which cannot but be noticed about the working of the mind of the decision makers.   The unceremonious manner in which the order was served on the applicant speaks for itself.  It could never have been a bonafide decision as is attempted to be made out for securing the ends for which it has been avowedly made.    The respondent has not effectively met the contention of the applicant that it was not a bonafide exercise of power, to issue Annexure A-1.  If that be so, it is arbitrariness personified, and for that reason it infringes the rights of the applicant envisaged under Part III of the Constitution of India.

20. Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights are looked down upon by Article 13.  May be the impugned order has been issued by the Executive Head of the State.  But Rule 135 (1)(a) of the R&AW (Recruitment, Cadre & Service) Rule is too loosely worded.  Even if we give a margin and take note the background of the legislation, arbitrariness in exercising powers under the rules cannot be ruled out.  In spite of opportunity to defend, the Respondents have not come up with any definite or convincing reason for the turn of events as they appear.    The Prime Minister obviously might have been acting on the basis of the reports presented before him.  But it could have been only one sided, and reports have been prepared by persons who are not friendly with the applicant.  Opportunity for hearing any other version has been virtually denied. In this context, the too short interval as between the date of the order of the Tribunal, referred to earlier and the date of the impugned proceedings becomes significant.  Nothing has been stated as to why resort to Article 311 (c) has not been resorted to.  If that was the case, the competent authority to pass an order would have been the President of India and none else.  As a civil servant the applicant was entitled to the protection of Article 311 of the Constitution of India.  This is because shortcomings of the applicant are shown as a reason for issuing the impugned order.  A subsidiary rule, we feel, is insufficient to annihilate the guaranteed rights as are available to an officer, who had put in considerable years of service.  As we have found that the applicant has been denied protection of law, which is a fundamental right under Article 14 of the Constitution, it may not be necessary for us to further deliberate on the constitutionality of Rule 135 (1)(a) of the R&AW (RCS) Rules or declare that the rule invoked is void, since it operates to contravene clause (2) of Article 311.

21. We are also of the view that in case the applicant had acted in an indisciplined manner, it would have been proper to invoke the conduct rules (CCS (CCA) Rules) for taking action against her.  Merely because in matters of pension, a person who is eased out by invoking Rule 135 (1)(a) of the R&AW (Recruitment, Cadre & Service) Rules, comes to be given a fair deal, it can be of no real or lasting solace to him.  As pointed out by the applicant, the stigma would have hurt and pinned her down for the rest of her life.  Even if it may be possible to contend that technically the officer is not discharged for unsuitability, the impact the order that would have made on her practical life could well be imagined.  The respondents have in effect snapped her right to life, again guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution.

22. Fundamental rights are too precious for a person to lose and law is clear that even on his consent, the rights cannot be permitted to be surrendered.  State is not, therefore, empowered to deny it on a plea that it may affect the security of the State, of course, unless specifically authorized by constitutional prescription.  The circumstances highlighted by respondents for issuing Annexure A-1 order are hardly convincing.  As we had referred to earlier, there is no casual connection with the mere exposure of identity of an officer and the security of the State as such.  The international intercourse may be complex.  By experience gained, code of conduct and norms should have been prescribed, discreet methods were required to be developed.  Unaudited funds may be available for facilitating functioning of specialized organizations.  It is to be ensured that they are put to appropriate use.  In the present day world shift from information scarcity to surfeit has brought about changes in outlook all round.   The technological advancement has been lading to information explosion.  It is said that the decoding of human genome required collecting data relating to three billion base pairs, which work had taken about twelve years in the last decade, but now it could be done within less than a week.  It is only an example.  There can be nothing gained, by asking the officers of R&AW to keep to their shells.  If espionage is a must, it needs to be carried out on the advice of the best brains.   It could almost be reassured that the bio data of R&AW personnel lock, stock and barrel already would be with persons who need them.  The Government like an ostrich is not expected to burry its head in sand and be complacent.  Adversaries are to be met at their levels, and one may feel that the behavioral mechanism as of now is rather childish. There is already justifiable criticism in the air, that even democracies, globally, have abandoned or at least pushed back priorities in matters of human rights and are contended to highlight the subject only on occasional speeches or deliberations in conferences, where nothing happens.  There has developed personnel contradiction between recognizing human rights and foreign policies of the State.  But so long as we are expected to uphold constitutional rights of an individual, we cannot be silent witness to at least such unpalatable happening brought to our notice.  The right to life, and all fundamental rights requires to be zealously guarded and such rights of a citizen should not be permitted to be crushed by the onslaught of the State machinery. The administrative law is a part of public law.   Every one is bound by the Constitution.  Judicial review of the administrative action necessarily has to be rested on the totality of the situations presented with special reference to guaranteed and undeniable rights conferred on a civil servant.


23. Indeed, we are not unmindful of the dictum of the Hon ble Supreme Court, gatherable from LIC of India Vs. Escorts Ltd. (1986 (1) SCC 264).    While construing statutes enacted in the National interest only the broad factual situations require to be emphasized in an effort to advance National interest proposed by the legislation.  We find that this situation itself cannot authorize the Government to do away with the basic, statutory and constitutional rights of an individual, his dignity or sense of belonging to the society.  We hold that even within the framework of the provision, which we consciously keep undisturbed, the applicant could not have been prejudiced as have been attempted.  Indeed we found that the applicant, perhaps because of her family background, education and exposure was conducting herself very well in the Court, and normally would have been an asset to the organization.  We, of course, feel that the alleged escapades of her superiors should not have bothered her unduly as she was well capable of looking after herself, as is evident, ignoring any such overtures with distain.  We refrain from sermonizing.  However, it is plain that respondents have resorted to use the weapon of the statute, which was exclusive to their armoury.  This was unfair.




24. We, therefore, quash Annexure A-1 and direct that the applicant should be restored to her status as was existing on 17.12.2009.  Follow up orders are to be issued within six weeks from today.  The applicant will be entitled to consequential benefits of reinstatement with salary.  However, she will have to remit back the compensation she might have received (if any) as might have been paid because of the working of Annexure A-1.

25. We refrain , however, from passing any order as to costs.


 (N.D. Dayal           (M. Ramachandran)    
 Member (A)           Vice Chairman (J)    

`SRD

Monday, March 15, 2010

WHY AND WHAT FOR NUCLEAR BILL PUT ON HOLD?

15 March 2010

WHY AND WHAT FOR 

NUCLEAR LIABILITY BILL PUT ON HOLD



By R Rajagopalan/Jal Khamabta

NEW DELHI: Sensing the opposition parties re-uniting alike on price
rise, the government on Monday developed cold feet as it backed off
from introducing the controversial Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage
Bill, exempting reactor suppliers from liability in case of an
accident and limiting plant operator's liability too to only Rs 500
crores.

Minister of State for Science Prithviraj Chavan walked to the
Opposition benches in the Lok Sabha during Question Hour to convey
that the Prime Minister has asked him not to introduce the Bill in the
House in view of their strong sentiments but to hold further
consultations before taking it up in Parliament.

Opposition leader Sushma Swaraj, followed by BJP veteran Lal Krishna
Advani, were miffed at the government withdrawing the Bill's
introduction without giving any reason when Speaker Meira Kumar
announced Chavan informing her that the Bill, though listed on day's
agenda at Item No 19, will not be introduced.

"The government has made the request and I have accepted it," the
Speaker asserted when the Opposition all prepared to jointly prevent
the Bill's introduction wanted to speak on it. She, however, cut them
short that she cannot allow them to speak on a Bill that has not been
yet introduced.

Nobody from the government was ready to state when the Bill will be
now brought before Parliament. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh wanted it
passed before he goes to the United States in April for a meeting of
the nuclear countries convened by President Barrack Obama.

A top source in the ruling Congress said its President Sonia Gandhi
asked Manmohan Singh to go slow with the Bill in view of reservations
to the damage clause also from some within the party. She was
concerned that any attempt to push the Bill at this stage may
adversely hit the Congress-BJP-Left unity so vital for getting her
dream bill of women's reservation passed in the Lok Sabha after the
financial business is over in April.

The Prime Minister rang up Sushma Swaraj on Sunday and National
Security Adviser Shiv Shankar Menon personally called upon Rajya Sabha
Opposition leader Arun Jaitley to seek support to the Bill but without
success. Both suggested that at the most they will agree to reference
of the Bill to the parliamentary standing committee to examine it
thoroughly.

On Monday, the main opposition BJP made its position clear that the
liability bill can come only if the government first amends the Atomic
Energy Act to allow private parties set up the nuclear power plants as
otherwise it would be unconstitutional to delimit liability of the
government that owns all such plants in the country.

The Bill is part of the Indo-US civilian nuclear deal of 2006 and a
requirement of the 123 civil nuclear agreement between India and the
US as the American companies are not prepared to sell any nuclear
equipment for fear of unlimited liabilities in case of a nuclear
accident as happened with the Union Carbide accident in which hundreds
were killed in Bhopal 25 years ago.

While Opposition leader Sushma Swaraj insisted on the Chair putting a
motion before the House to allow the government drop the Bill since it
was already listed, Advani said the government has right to bring a
Bill or not but it is duty bound to the House to explain it has been
held up for fresh review. The Speaker, however, over-ruled them that
explanation is warranted only if a Bill is introduced and then
withdrawn.

When BJP's Yashwant Sinha persisted with explanation in the post-lunch
session, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pawan Bansal asserted that the
government's decision to introduce or not to introduce a legislation
can not be questioned in the House.

Sinha later told a Press conference that the liability law was
unconstitutional and not required when the whole nuclear business is
in the government's hand. He charged that the Bill is to help out only
two American firms, Westinghouse and General Electric, that supply
nuclear reactors to absolve them of any liability for defects that may
cause accidents.

The BJP leader also released a letter he had written to the Lok Sabha
Secretary General in the morning to allow him to raise the
constitutional objections before the Bill is introduced in the House.
The letter asserts that the Bill violates Article 14 and 21 of the
Constitution. The Bill violates principle of equality as enunciated in
Article 14 as it limits amount of compensation while law of the land
entitles the citizen to full compensation.

Sinha also quoted a Supreme Court ruling introducing the "polluter
pays principle" under which it is not the role of the government to
meet the costs of damages as the Bill stipulates but the concerned
industry has to pay the compensation to the victims of accidents as
part of their fundamental rights under Article 21.

Moreover, Sinha said the Bill limits the operator's liability to only
Rs 500 crores (US $109) and rather it not only limits the liability
but transfers a large part of the liability to the government. In
other words, the tax payer has to pay for any nuclear accident.

Sinha also pointed out that the same US government that is insisting
on this Bill has the Price Anderson Act that fixes the liability at
$12.5 billion which is 23 times higher than the liability being fixed
for an Indian operator. "Is the life of an Indian only worth a dime
compared to the life of an American," he asked.

###

Saturday, March 13, 2010

navin jindal is convenor indian parliamentary forum on children


Navin Jindal is the convenor of 
Indian Parliamnetary Forum on Children 
SPEAKER LOK SABHA TO INAUGURATE
ON MONDAY

By R Rajagopalan
 
Lok Sabha Secretariat, the Speaker, Lok Sabha Meira Kumar has constituted  
a 37 MPs Parliamentary Forum on Children with  broad aim and objective of 
to identify and discuss the problems relating to children and to equip 
the Members of Parliament with the information and knowledge 
related to children and to make them aware of the seriousness 
of the issues involved, which would enable them to adopt a result-oriented 
approach towards this critical issue.  

Nain Jindal is the Convenor of this Forum.
 
 The inaugural meeting of the Parliamentary Forum on Children 
will be held on Monday, the 15 March, 2010 at 1500 hrs. in 
Committee Room No. 074, Ground Floor, ParliamentLibrary 
Building, New Delhi.   the members of the forum are

INDIAN PARLIAMENTARY FORUM ON CHILDREN                                              

President
1.            
Shrimati  Meira Kumar
-
Speaker, Lok Sabha
Vice-President
2.            
Shri K. Rahman Khan
-
Deputy Chairman, Rajya Sabha
3.            
Shri Kariya Munda
-
Deputy Speaker, Lok Sabha
4.            
Shri Kapil Sibal
-
Minister of Human Resource Development
5.            
Shri Mallikarjun Kharge
-
Minister of Labour and Employment
6.            
Shri Ghulam Nabi Azad
-
Minister of Health and Family Welfare  
7.            
Shrimati  Krishna Tirath
-
Minister of State (Independent Charge) for the 
Ministry of Women and Child Development

8.            
Shri Oscar Fernandes-
Chairman, Standing Committee on Human Resource Development
9.            
Shri Hemanand Biswal-
Chairman, Standing Committee on Labour
Member-Convener
10.         
Shri Naveen Jindal  
Members (Lok Sabha)
11.         
Shrimati  Harsimrat Kaur Badal
12.         
Shrimati  Sarika Devendra Singh Baghel
13.         
Shri E.T. Mohammed Basheer
14.         
Shrimati  Susmita Bauri
15.         
Dr. Mirza Mehboob Beg
16.         
Dr. Ratna De (Nag)
17.         
Shrimati  Davidson J. Helen
18.         
Shri Prataprao Ganpatrao Jadhav
19.         
Dr.  Virendra Kumar
20.         
Shri P. Lingam
21.         
Shrimati P. Jaya Prada Nahata
22.         
Shri Konakalla Narayana Rao
23.         
Shri S. Semmalai
24.         
Shri Umashanker Singh
25.         
Shri N. Chaluvaraya Swamy
26.         
Shri Manohar Tirkey
27.         
Shri Laxman Tudu
Members (Rajya Sabha)
28.         
Shrimati Jaya Bachchan
29.         
Shri Jabir Husain
30.         
Shrimati Kanimozhi
31.         
Shri Saman Pathak
32.         
Shrimati Renubala Pradhan
33.         
Shri G.N. Ratanpuri
34.         
Ms. Mabel Rebello
35.         
Shri Abani Roy
36.         
Shrimati Maya Singh
37.         
Shri Veer Singh

ends
   

DELHI GOSSIPS


For publication on Sunday March 15, 2010
NEW DELHI GRAPEVINE GOSSIPS

By R Rajagopalan

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rahul  Gandhi was in central hall of parliament on thursday. He was meeting
many Congress MPs.On seeing Biju Janata Dal MP Prasanna Patsani
Rahul called him'Swamiji" did you get consent? It is now crucial.
On hearing this, many MPs went near to Patsani who wears a saffron robe
and look like a "Saadhu" and asked what was the secret that he negotiated with
Rahul. Patsani replied that all about Women, Both of us are Bachelors. Do not ask
me further. BJD supports womens bill. Privately speaking Patsani said that
10 MPs of Biju Janata Dal are against 33%
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silver Jubilee for Special Protection Group (SPG) is being celebrated with a fan fare on
April 5, 2010 in New Delhi. This elite crack commando force which has been
protecting the Prime Ministers since 1985. On March 30, SPG and on April 6
there are several cultural and lecture programmes. Nandan Nelikani will be
delivering a commemorative lecture. Inder Gujral, Deve Gowda and Atal Bihari
Vajpayee are the three surviving former Prime Ministers, Atalji continue to get SPG
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mamta Banerjee Railway Minister is too sentimental and emotional leader.
When three Yadavs taken Mamta name that she alone moderated and
helped to bring peace,between Yadavs and Govt, she was feeling too happy
internally. But she was drawing a 'train' enginee" which was too visible
from the press gallery of Lok Sabha. Two or three Union Ministers who sat
next to her, were commenting that she is too sensitive and mercurial.
Do not disturb her drawing.let her be at peace to sketch her ministry logo
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anand Sharma Union Minister of late does not speak too much, as his
renomination is due for Rajya Sabha.However, Mamta Banerjee taken
Anand separately in Parliament House and went on to scold a senior
colleague in uncertain terms. How can you support West bengal Chief
minister when I am fighting them. Does he know Hindi, Bengali
he can speak toungelanshing English. In rural areas english is not going
to get Trinamool votes. That is why I am not attending the cabinet
You (anand sharma) go and tell this to PM and also to that Minister.
Such was her anger
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENDS

delhi corridor grapevine gossips

12-3-2010


NEW DELHI GRAPEVINE SNIPPETS
for publication on  Sunday March 14. 2010


Thanks
R Rajagopalan
Delhi
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three line whip for womens bill was sent to Rajya Sabha MPs by SMS
Both Congress and BJP have now adopted to send mobile phone SMS
and emails, to their MPs.

DMK has also begun this process. S S Palanimanickam has objected
SMS practice. Because SMS does not have legal sanctity. MPs can defy that
and deny that they ever received.DMK has 18 MPs in Lok Sabha. Even their
party organisational matters are now being put to SMS

Parliamentary practice of three line whip has been such that in the Parliamentary
Party letter head the Chief Whip will sign individually on photocopies of the letter.
The necessity for three lines whip will always be mentioned. Much more requirement
which is statutory is that the word WHIP should be in capital alphabets which will
be in BOLD letters, important is that under the WHIP there shall be three lines.
Emphasising the necessity for the presence of the MPs in the house.

Joke amongst the SMS does not have three lines underscoring the word
whip.  How it would be legal. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Soon after the Womens Bill were passed, the AICC media cell organised
an exclusive one to one interview with almost all TV Channels.It was another
coincidence that Sonia Gandhi gave interviews only to Women editors and journalists
and politely told the male editors that there shall be a separate TEA or breakfast with them
once Lok Sabha passed the womens bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Clinic first time being heard ... For MPs the CGHS clinic is well known for 
but for the first time a computer clinic is coming up. Many MPs found the following 
circular amazing. when they read it.-
 A Computer Clinic for the Members of Rajya Sabha aNd their personal staff
 is proposed to be organized by the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, in collaboration
 with the NIC during Budget Session from 26 to 30 April,  2010. Officers/Engineers from NIC will impart training on Computer
Basics and also familiarize the Members and their Personal
Staff with features of Rajya Sabha Website and other Government
Websites and also sort out operational/technical difficulties being
faced in accessing internet or any other computer related matters.
Members are requested to send their nomination and also
 nominate their personal staff for the said Computer Clinic latest by 18 March, 2010. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ends

Friday, March 12, 2010

new delhi corridor gossips


March 11, 2010


For publication on Sunday March 15, 2010
NEW DELHI GRAPEVINE GOSSIPS

By R Rajagopalan

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rahul  Gandhi was in central hall of parliament on thursday. He was meeting
many Congress MPs.On seeing Biju Janata Dal MP Prasanna Patsani
Rahul called him'Swamiji" did you get consent? It is now crucial.
On hearing this, many MPs went near to Patsani who wears a saffron robe
and look like a "Saadhu" and asked what was the secret that he negotiated with
Rahul. Patsani replied that all about Women, Both of us are Bachelors. Do not ask
me further. BJD supports womens bill. Privately speaking Patsani said that
10 MPs of Biju Janata Dal are against 33%
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silver Jubilee for Special Protection Group (SPG) is being celebrated with a fan fare on
April 5, 2010 in New Delhi. This elite crack commando force which has been
protecting the Prime Ministers since 1985. On March 30, SPG and on April 6
there are several cultural and lecture programmes. Nandan Nelikani will be
delivering a commemorative lecture. Inder Gujral, Deve Gowda and Atal Bihari
Vajpayee are the three surviving former Prime Ministers, Atalji continue to get SPG
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mamta Banerjee Railway Minister is too sentimental and emotional leader.
When three Yadavs taken Mamta name that she alone moderated and
helped to bring peace,between Yadavs and Govt, she was feeling too happy
internally. But she was drawing a 'train' enginee" which was too visible
from the press gallery of Lok Sabha. Two or three Union Ministers who sat
next to her, were commenting that she is too sensitive and mercurial.
Do not disturb her drawing.let her be at peace to sketch her ministry logo
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anand Sharma Union Minister of late does not speak too much, as his
renomination is due for Rajya Sabha.However, Mamta Banerjee taken
Anand separately in Parliament House and went on to scold a senior
colleague in uncertain terms. How can you support West bengal Chief
minister when I am fighting them. Does he know Hindi, Bengali
he can speak toungelanshing English. In rural areas english is not going
to get Trinamool votes. That is why I am not attending the cabinet
You (anand sharma) go and tell this to PM and also to that Minister.
Such was her anger
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENDS

EX ARMY MEN THANK -- ADVANI

12 March 2010

LK'S CLASH WITH PM FINALLY HELPS EX-SERVICEMEN

From Our Delhi Bureau

NEW DELHI: A head-on clash of BJP veteran Lal Krishna Advani with
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the Lok Sabha on March 3 during
debate on the motion of thanks on the President's address has finally
helped the lower ranks of ex-servicemen, ending their eight-month long
wait for higher pension,

The Prime Minister's Office (PMO) had swung into action, snubbing
bureaucrats sitting over the pension orders in the Ministry of Defence
(MoD), after Advani accused the PM of lying in the Lok Sabha that
commitment he gave to ex-servicemen in his Independence Day address
has been met.

Dr Manmohan Singh had to admit in his reply to debate that two of the
seven recommendations of a committee headed by the cabinet secretary
had not yet been enforced but they will be also implemented "very
soon." These were the very recommendations that met the sort of "one
rank, one pension" demand.

The PMO made the MoD issue the orders early this week increasing
pension of jawans and non-commissioned officers that will benefit some
12 lakh pensioners of the Armed Forces. The new orders also bring
parity in pension and removing the anomaly of seniors drawing less
than juniors.

The new orders enforce the committee recommendation to bring parity of
pension among those retired before October 10, 1997 and those who
retired after that date. The parity will be applicable to all persons
below other ranks (PBORS) of the Army, Air Force and Navy, the order
said.

The second part of the latest MoD instructions is to improve pensions
as per the 2006 award of the Group of Ministers (GoM) which was also
part of the committee's recommendations.

The two issues were hanging afire since early last year when the
committee gave its recommendations. An attempt of the Congress to take
the mileage in the Lok Sabha elections by getting a report published
that the committee's recommendations on the demands of ex-servicemen
had been cleared had even attracted the Election Commission's censure.

###

Monday, March 8, 2010

real rowdisim inside RS


REAL ROWDISM INSIDE RAJYA SABHA
HAMEED ANSARI RATTLED

bill torn out-SP and RJD MPs went nasty.

By R Rajagopalan


Rowdisim in Rajya Sabha by SP and RJD MPs.
To tear out the womens bill.

Hameed Ansari Chairman Rajya Sabha was rattled. He could not control his
feelings. Otherwise also Ansari being a diplomat, remained cool. But never seen
unruly rowdism being played inside house


Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh discussed with  his senior Minsterial colleagues Pranab, Gulam, Pawan Bansal
and Salman Khursheed. Sonia Gandhi reached Ten Janpath. She called Pranab for a closed
door discussions Ahmed patel was in central hall. janardan diwedi went to ahmed patel
and told him to rush to ten janpath. Sonia Gandhi was told about the withdrawal threat of Lalu and Mulayam
Sonia is undeterred, not at all disturbed according to a source

12.35 pm: Central Hall of Parliament full. Women MPs obviously excited. Sonia seen with Ahmed Patel and Jairam Ramesh. Last minute strategy?

12.15 noon: Further delay in introducing the Women's Reservation bill as the Rajya Sabha is adjourned till 2.00 pm following uproar by SP, RJD demanding implementation of Ranganath Misra Commission report on minority welfare. Meanwhile, the Lok Sabha too is adjourned till 2 pm amid uproar by SP, RJD and BSP members demanding reservation to dalit, OBC and minority community in the Women's Reservation Bill.

11.30 am: Law Minister M. Verappa Moily will read a statement on the Women's Reservation Bill in the Rajya Sabha at noon.

 Raya Sabha adjourned till noon amid uproar over the demand from SP and RJD for implementation of the Ranganath Misra Commission report on minority welfare. 

BJP leader in the Rajya Sabha, Arun Jaitely, was seen in animated discussion with Samajwadi Party MPs. Perhaps trying to make them see the writing on the wall and to ask them not to disrupt proceedings when the bill is introduced.

Many ministers are seen wearing tensed looks in the central hall of Parliament, though nobody suspects any threat to the government.

11.15 am: The heat is on. As parliament is about to assemble to discuss and debate the bill to reserve 33 percent of the seats in all directly elected legislatures, there is a buzz around parliament like never before.

B B Tiwari, leader of the Samajwadi Party in Rajya Sabha 
there is no way the bill will be introduced in the house at noon, as scheduled. 
The Bharatiya Janata Party has put the burden of maintaining order in the Rajya Sabha, where the bill will be introduced on the centenary day of Women's Day today, squarely on the ruling party. This is because the Yadav trio, Lalu Prasad of Rashtriya Janata Dal, Mulayam Singh of Samajwadi Party and Sharad of Janata Dal (United), have threatened to do everything in their mite to stall the introduction and debate over the bill. Sharad Yadav is president of the JD(U), a party with which the BJP shares power in Bihar. The BJP has committed its support to the passage of the bill.
About 100 outdoor broadcast vans of news channels cluttered the Vijay Chowk lawns, far in excess of the numbers that even the nuclear deal debate of July 2009 that threatened to pull down the government.
TTV Dinakaran of Jayalalithaa's AIADMK made a first time appearance in the Rajya Sabha to attend and vote for the bill. Dinakaran has been banned by Jaya from attending the house due to some internal party politics. Dinakaran took special permission from her to be present today.As leader of the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will be voting in favour of the bill at the end of the debate.

ends

behind the scene drama on womens bill

behind the scene drama on womens bill

Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh discussed with
his senior Minsterial colleagues Pranab, Gulam, Pawan Bansal
and Salman Khursheed.

Sonia Gandhi reached Ten Janpath. She called Pranab for a closed
door discussions

Ahmed patel was in central hall. janardan diwedi went to ahmed patel
and told him to rush to ten janpath.

Sonia Gandhi was told about the withdrawal threat of Lalu and Mulayam

Sonia is undeterred, not at all disturbed according to a source



12.35 pm: Central Hall of Parliament full. Women MPs obviously excited. Sonia seen with Ahmed Patel and Jairam Ramesh. Last minute strategy?

12.15 noon: Further delay in introducing the Women's Reservation bill as the Rajya Sabha is adjourned till 2.00 pm following uproar by SP, RJD demanding implementation of Ranganath Misra Commission report on minority welfare. Meanwhile, the Lok Sabha too is adjourned till 2 pm amid uproar by SP, RJD and BSP members demanding reservation to dalit, OBC and minority community in the Women's Reservation Bill.

11.30 am: Law Minister M. Verappa Moily will read a statement on the Women's Reservation Bill in the Rajya Sabha at noon.

► Raya Sabha adjourned till noon amid uproar over the demand from SP and RJD for implementation of the Ranganath Misra Commission report on minority welfare.

► BJP leader in the Rajya Sabha, Arun Jaitely, was seen in animated discussion with Samajwadi Party MPs. Perhaps trying to make them see the writing on the wall and to ask them not to disrupt proceedings when the bill is introduced.

►Many ministers are seen wearing tensed looks in the central hall of Parliament, though nobody suspects any threat to the government.

11.15 am: The heat is on. As parliament is about to assemble to discuss and debate the bill to reserve 33 percent of the seats in all directly elected legislatures, there is a buzz around parliament like never before.

►B B Tiwari, leader of the Samajwadi Party in Rajya Sabha tells Governance Now there is no way the bill will be introduced in the house at noon, as scheduled.

10.45 am:

► The Bharatiya Janata Party has put the burden of maintaining order in the Rajya Sabha, where the bill will be introduced on the centenary day of Women's Day today, squarely on the ruling party. This is because the Yadav trio, Lalu Prasad of Rashtriya Janata Dal, Mulayam Singh of Samajwadi Party and Sharad of Janata Dal (United), have threatened to do everything in their mite to stall the introduction and debate over the bill. Sharad Yadav is president of the JD(U), a party with which the BJP shares power in Bihar. The BJP has committed its support to the passage of the bill.

► About 100 outdoor broadcast vans of news channels cluttered the Vijay Chowk lawns, far in excess of the numbers that even the nuclear deal debate of July 2009 that threatened to pull down the government.

► TTV Dinakaran of Jayalalithaa's AIADMK made a first time appearance in the Rajya Sabha to attend and vote for the bill. Dinakaran has been banned by Jaya from attending the house due to some internal party politics. Dinakaran took special permission from her to be present today.

►As leader of the Rajya Sabha, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will be voting in favour of the bill at the end of the debate.

ENDS

Sunday, March 7, 2010

HAMEED ANSARI ZINDABAD


Hameed bhai  Ansari Zindabad


TRP rating of Rajya Sabha TV Channel will be the highest 
today as many would watch proceedings sitting in their drawing rooms
work places and also while travelling as it is now live telecast on internet too

What a struggle Chairman Rajya Sabha undergone to have a RS TV channel
from the clutches of LS TV domination. 

Finally you won
Zindabad Ansari saheb,

And today RS channel is TRP First


R Rajagopalan
8-3-2010

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Yedurappa and Dr Manmohan Singh



"Nutrition Commission for Children"
PRIME MINISTER BRAINCHILD BEING
IMPLEMENTED BY BJP GOVT IN KARNATAKA

By Delhi correspondent

Veena Rao formerly Secretary to Union Ministry of North Eastern Council has been appointed
as Chairman of Nutrition Commission of Karnataka, to evolve strategies to bring in nutrition
revolution in the state of Karnataka. This is the pet subject of Dr Manmohan Singh, but
Yedurappa is implementing the scheme.

Malnutrition is a shame for India, the prime minister has repeatedly stressed. But beyond making such statements very little has been done to provide nutrition to hungry children of the poor. Now Karnataka has made a start in that direction.

A comprehensive nutrition mission to bring down the number of children suffering from malnutrition in the state has been proposed by the B.S. Yeddyurappa government in its state budget. 

Yeddyurappa said: “The number of children suffering from malnutrition is very significant in our state. Special efforts are required to be made for overcoming this problem. The government proposes to start a Comprehensive Nutrition Mission.”

In Karnataka, 37.6% of children are underweight, 28.1% of the population is undernourished and 5.5% of children who die under the age of 5 die from hunger, according to independent estimates.  

The pilot project has been allotted Rs 5 crore. The mission to eradicate malnutrition is said to have had the strong backing of Chief Secretary S V Ranganath and was is the brainchild of Veena S Rao, an IAS officer of Karnataka cadre who is an expert on the subject. Veena recently retired as secretary to the government of India.

According to a decade-old World Bank study, nearly half of the children (47 percent) in India suffer from malnutrition, a figure second only to Bangladesh. Eradicating this problem is one of the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) but there is no action on the ground.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in his successive Independence Day speeches has said that malnutrition in India remains a matter of shame. Yet, the centre or the state governments have never taken an initiative to check it at the grassroots level. The Karnataka move, however, brings with it some hope that the other states may follow suit. 

Apart from this special provision for malnutrition in the budget for nutrition, the state will also provide Rs.380 crore for the next year for security to 7.21 lakh girls from poor families under the Bhagyalakshmi scheme. 

The institutions running schools for mentally retarded, blind, autistic children and children suffering from other handicaps will be given Rs.20 crore under the budget.

ends

electronic umbrella for parliament

6 March 2010

PARLIAMENT TO HAVE ELECTRONIC UMBRELLA

From Our Delhi Bureau

NEW DELHI: The Parliament House already having four layers of security
making it impossible for entry of any unauthorised person will soon
have an electronic umbrella to secure it further from any possible air
attack.

A proposal before the 10-member joint committee on security in
Parliament complex is to install a radar on the rooftop of the
historical Parliament House building that will be manned by the Indian
Air Force to prevent any possible attack from sky.

The proposal is listed for consideration by the committee, headed by
Lok Sabha deputy speaker Karia Munda, at its first meeting here on
Thursday.

The committee set up by the Speaker for constantly reviewing and
beefing up security in the Parliament House as felt necessary is,
however, steering clear of installing the full-body scanners that are
being put on the airports for an added caution to prevent anybody
sneaking in with terror material.

Set up particularly to upcheck implementation of recommendations made
by the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on security, the committee
has been tasked to prepare a comprehensive report on Parliament
security by defining the threat perceptions and likely security
scenario in future.

Besides Munda as its chairman, other committee members from the Lok
Sabha are: Kirti Azad, Dr Mirza Mehboob Beb, P C Chacko, Dara Singh
Chauhan, Jiyaraj Singh, and Sushila Saroj. Members from the Rajya
Sabha are S S Ahluwalia (BJP), D Raja (CPI) and Satyavrat Chaturvedi
(Cong).

###

KAKODKAR ROPED IN BY RSS ON NATIONAL SECURITY

7 March 2010

KAKODKAR ROPED IN BY RSS FORUM ON NATIONAL SECURITY

From Our Delhi Bureau

NEW DELHI: A pro-RSS Forum for Integrated National Security (FINS) has
roped in former Atomic Energy Commission chairman Dr Anil Kakodkar to
be the star speaker at a 2-day national security convention it is
holding at Haridwar from Tuesday.

Uttarakhand Chief Minister Dr Ramesh Pokhriyal has been writing
letters to the Prime Minister and Chief Ministers stressing that the
VVIPs should stay away from Haridwar during the ongoing Kumbh Mela as
their security becomes difficult during such a large congregation.

He is, however, himself part of the steering committee organising the
seminar as it serves the purpose of his party, the Bhartiya Janata
Party, to nail the UPA government for what it claims security
failures. A forum press release says the convention will be attended
by 700 delegates from all walks of life.

The forum, in fact, justifies its decision to hold the convention
during the fair period. Pointing out that the Kumbh Mela is the single
largest centuries-old uninterrupted non-governmental gathering of
civil society, it asks: "What other occasion and venue could be more
appropriate and ideal to deliberate and disseminate an important
message about national security?"

Issues debated over the two days are: Global security, regional
security, border and coastal security, internal security, Naxalism and
Maoism, North East and Kashmir.

Colour of the debate that will be taking place is reflected from the
galaxy of speakers, besides Dr Kakodkar, listed for the inaugural
session like Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi, Uttarakhand Chief
Minister Ramesh Pokhariyal 'Nishank', BJP MP Najma Heptulla, Nagaland
chief minister Neiphiu Rio, Lt Gen (retd) D B Sheketkar who is a
prominent face at BJP rallies and Swami Satyamitra Nand Maharaj.

Same kind of line-up is also for the concluding session on Wednesday
when the speakers include RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat, Lok Sabha deputy
speaker Karia Munda, Himachal chief minister Prof. Prem Kumar Dhumal
and Swami Ravi Shankar of Art of Living.

Speakers listed for other sessions include former foreign secretary
Kanwal Sibal, former NCERT chief Dr J S Rajput, former Intelligence
Bureau chief Ajit Doval, and Pioneer editor and BJP executive member
Chandan Mitra.

In a press statement issued on Saturday, FINS said the convention will
focus on internal and external security of India that is in grave
danger. "This is matter of concern for common people as well as
security experts, and calls for an open and comprehensive debate at
the national level," it added.

###

DMK MINISTER RAJA SHOOTS DOWN PITRODA PLANS

6 March 2010

VAARTHA



EXCLUSIVE

RAJA SHOOTS DOWN PITRODA PLAN TO SACK 1 LAKH BSNL STAFF

From R Rajagopalan

NEW DELHI: Union Communications and IT Minister A Raja shot off a
terse note to the Prime Minister's office two days ago, shooting down
a plan recommended by a PM-appointed panel headed by telecom czar Sam
Pitroda to revive flagging fortunes of the state-owned telecom firm
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) by offloading its 30 per cent
stakes in stock markets through an IPO (initial public offer) and cut
down staff strength by one-third from 3 lakhs to 2 lakhs.

Raja, who belongs to DMK, sensed a massive labour trouble in BSNL that
may impact even fortunes of his party in DMK supremo and chief
minister M Karunanidhi planning early Assembly polls in Tamil Nadu in
September instead of letting it complete full term in May 2011. He is
believed to have consulted Karunanidhi before dashing off a 4-point
confidential note on Thursday to the Cabinet Secretary and the
Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister.

Pitroda, who is credited with laying foundation of India's telecom
revolution a quarter century ago as part of then Prime Minister Rahul
Gandhi's team, wants 20 per cent of the BSNL share sales used to
relieve some one lakh employees that he found surplus by offering them
VRS (voluntary retirement scheme).

Raja has tried to scuttle his proposal by suggesting in his
confidential letter that his panel's recommendations amount to a major
policy change that should be better placed before the Telecom
Commission for a view.

Sources said his prime concern is the kind of retrenchment recommended
by Pitroda who has not to bear political fallout of such an
anti-labour act that will certainly adversely affect the UPA
government's image.
Already under attack for 2G spectrum allocation controversy that is
under the CBI probe, Raja does not want to get into a labour problem
in the BSNL, sources said.

Here is a copy of Raja confidential note accessed by this correspondent:

========

Confidential
4-3-2010

Discussed with Secretary (T) and CMD BSNL. The purpose for which the
reference has been made to the Committee headed by Sam Pitroda is not
fulfilled despite the fact that the management Committee of BSNL
accepts the concepts of transition.

2.  Wider implications on retrenchment  of staff and immediate
requirement of BSNL till the new system is adopted have to be
addressed at length in the BSNL Board.

3.  The decision of the BSNL Board may be placed before the Pitroda
committee which may be requested to convene a meeting in Delhi so that
if any further clarifications required by the Committee can be
provided by the BSNL.

4.  If it is once decided to switch to new system of management
services, if should be placed before the full Telecom Commission since
it is a major policy change and decision with respect to the BSNL.

A RAJA
(M CIT)

1) CABINET SECRETARY

2)PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO PRIME MINISTER

=========

Besides recommending an IPO of BSNL to offload 30 per cent stakes and
reduce the large workforce, Pitroda has also recommended that it be
managed by three top executive hired from the private sector who can
bring a business culture in the company. He also wants BSNL to raise
funds by selling its infrastructure like the signal towers and real
estate and pointed out how it can not stand up in the extremely
competitive industry by continuing to follow antiquated procedures of
bureaucratic decisions.

Worried over the steep decline of BSNL's fortunes, the Prime Minister
had called in Pitroda to head a panel with banker Deepak Parekh and
Telecom secretary P J Thomas as members to suggest revival measures.
Sensing that the panel's recommendation to sell 30 per cent stakes
fits into the UPA government's declared policy of disinvestment while
not allowing the government share go below 51 per cent, Raja wants the
Prime Minister review the disastrous effect of other recommendations
of the panel.

BSNL is the second largest government body after Railways having a
nationwide infrastructure while Raja's worry is that it would lose the
dominant status it enjoys if he meekly yields to Pitroda's suggestions
to loosen the government's control over its working.

The Pitroda panel has underlined the BSNL's problem of interference by
the bureaucracy that rules over the business decisions of the company,
without probably understanding the nuances of the business itself.
"Allow the ministry to interact only through board representation and
board meetings and not through day-to-day decision-making, interfacing
and supervision," the panel has stressed.

###

Thursday, March 4, 2010

FOREIGN OFFICE DUPED?

3-3-2010



investigative news break story
for VAARTHA



HOW FOREIGN OFFICE
AND HOME MINISTRY APPROVED THE
FAKE-INVITATION TO
AN OFFICIAL?


INTERNET FRAUD
OF FOREIGN INVITE


Culpable for a fraud, more how did the Foreign Office 
and home ministry were duped?

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) has 
pushed under carpet a cyber fraud, at least until its chairperson and 
members retire in a month, to save them from accountability and 
embarrassment.

It made an upfront payment for hotel and its member travelled to London 
for a so-called UN-sponsored conference only to find there was no 
conference and nobody booked her hotel accommodation. The invite had 
come through Internet email  in April last year and all follow-up 
communication was also through emails.

Interestingly, the Ministry of Women and Child Welfare gave the 
administrative clearance and the External Affairs Ministry accorded the 
political clearance for the commission member Sandhya Bajaj to attend 
the conference, without suspecting any foul play.

Since the Indian High Commission was neither asked to verify bonafides 
of organisers and details of the conference nor was it communicated 
arrival of the commission member for protocol facilities like receiving 
her at the airport and lodging her in the hotel, the lady found herself 
totally lost.

Nobody even bothered to check with any UN office about the so called 
"10th MDGs International Conference" the world body was organising from 
May 26 to 29 after the fraudulent email landed on the desk of the 
commission chairman.

The truth came to light only on May 26 last year when the member rang 
up the chairperson to inform her that she has become victim of a fraud 
as nobody received her or contacted her on arrival and when she checked 
from the Hotel Hyde Park where her room had been booked and where the 
conference was to be held, she was told no such conference is taking 
place there and no room was booked in her name. She returned on May 28, 
a day before the conference was to conclude.

The exchequer lost a little less than Rs 1 lakh. The commission 
promptly ordered a preliminary inquiry by one A K Malhotra, a retired 
PSU officer providing human resource and legal consultancy. He was 
asked to give report within two weeks, but nothing became of the 
exhaustive 52-page report he filed, pointing out a score of 
irregularities. A case was also filed with the cyber cell of Delhi 
Police but no progress as the commission showed no interest.

The chairman and members of the commission are completing their term on 
April 4 and nobody wants the incident probed as it may bring out other 
scandals in the commission's cupboards and put them in the box much 
after they are retired and gone. It was this fear that prompted them 
not to report the incident to the Central Vigilance Commission or the 
Central Bureau of Investigation.

Some Indian appears to be involved in the cyber fraud as the commission 
was told through an email that the organisers will arrange the flight 
tickets for the delegate after the hotel booking is done by him or her 
and gave an ICICI Bank account to deposit the money for the hotel 
booking, claiming it was the account of the hotel's reservation officer 
Ansari Abdulla. A cash amount of Rs 36,400 was deposited in the ICICI 
Bank's New Delhi branch on May 22.

Nobody felt even slightly suspicious despite the fact that the hotels 
never ask for advance money while booking rooms, particularly when the 
request comes from a government organisation. Moreover, at the most the 
hotel will ask for the first day's deposit.

Nor did the commission approach the ICICI Bank immediately to know 
about Ansari and request for details of his accounts and whether he had 
transferred the money received in his account to anybody else. Even 
immediate police complaint was not preferred as the commission wanted 
first to go through preliminary inquiry on its own.

No explanation is also given as to what prompted the commission to buy 
the air tickets when the organisers had promised to provide them. 
During the inquiry, the staff said the member, Sandhya Bajaj, had 
ordered purchase of the tickets after money was released to her through 
a cheque.

The inquiry also revealed that the staff showed to Sandhya Bajaj an 
email sent by one Dr Suresh Kumar to her on May 11, a fortnight before 
her travel, that "this UN conference is fraud," but she ordered to 
ignore it and go ahead with programme. When confronted, she denied any 
such email and said Dr Suresh Kumar had a telephonic conversation only 
to request her for arranging his hotel accommodation for the conference 
he was also attending.

Sandhya Bajaj and the staff were engaged in running battle in a bid to 
put blame on each other for every irregularity. She accused the staff 
of not showing her all emails while the staff showed files to claim she 
returns papers without signing and so they cannot prove her consent on 
every step they took under her orders. 

Had the commission asked the sender of the email to send a formal 
invitation through post with details loke brochure on the conference, 
details of the participants, the delegate fee, etc., the fraud would 
have been nipped in the bud. Nor did anybody think it fit to intimate 
the Indian High Commission about the event in which the commission is 
participating.

###

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

PARLIAMENT SNIPPETS


March 3, 2010

FOR VAARTHA 

WEDNESDAY 
GRAPEVINE  PARLIAMENT SNIPPET

From R Rajagopalan 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesdays are the Prime Minister Day in Lok Sabha. PM also has roster duty.
Today Dr Manmohan Singh was in Lok Sabha. Between PM and Sonia Gandhi
the Leader of the House Pranab Mukherjee sits. From press gallery if it is understood
well, estimation of many correspondents is , the real master of the ceremony is
Pranab Mukherjee. He conducts the proceedings and gives instructions.  Pawar who 
sits right side of Sonia, does not indulge in chat or gossips.He would invariably
read question and answer paper.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mulayam Singh Yadav entered Lok Sabha at 1055. As house usually assembles at 1100 hours.
On seeing PM, Pranab da and Sonia Gandhi, Mulayam said with folded hands "Namaste"
Sonia also reciprocated. Lalu Prasad also stood up and greeted the treasury benches.Mulayam went near 
to Sonia and talked to her. So did Lalu Prasad. On seeing this, very effectively, Sushma 
gone from her seat to CPI and CPM and told them to continue protests. When these
were happening, the Marshall announced the arrival of Speaker Meira Kumar with 
his loud voice. Each went to their respective seats. Congress thought that 
by show of Mulayam coming near to treasury bench, the Opposition unity on
petro hike would be a good omen. But that was short lived. Lalu was first to shout
that suspend question hour reduce petro prices.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pawan Kumar Bansal asked Pranab Mukherjee whether he can cross floor and speak to
Sushma Swaraj to estimate the depth of the opposition unity in petrol hike. Mukherjee stopped
Bansal. Waved his hand thus pranab prevented bansal. Generally it is Parliamentary affairs
minister to establish close rapport with Opposition leaders. But Bansal is yet to succeed
Though Bansal and Sushma are college mates in Chandigarh in their mid twenties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonia Gandhi UPA Chairperson on Wednesday spent more than half an hour in central hall
with many Congress MPs. This is her first appearance in the Budget session. Girija Vyas MP
and Sachin Pilot both were chatting with Sonia. Elsewhere in Central Hall, senior Ministers
though saw her seated, none went near.BJP MPs cut jokes that is how Sonia Gandhi image
is builit up.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sonia Gandhi refused to speak on Petro price hike, Telangana or Naga talks.
I am here to enjoy coffee with you all is the message from her. she nodded her head
appearing with a latest hair style. She looked very exhausted. One journalist  commented
but she said, is it so, you check your eyes was her return compliment to journalist.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preparations are in full swing, for group of photo inside Parliament, near Central Hall for those
65 MPs to be taken on March 10. Putting Pandal, setting up of camera
and logistic work have begun. It is a routine photo. Rajya Sabha Secretariat
is organising this event.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ends

will pulok chatterjee return to PMO?



special news break story for VAARTHA


WILL PULOK CHATTERJEE RETURN TO PRIME MINISTER OFFICE?


By R Rajagopalan

Presence of Pulok Chatterjee in New Delhi has fuled a speculation
amongst top bureaucrats that the 1974 IAS batch officer may be pulled
out of his present assignment as Executive Director World Bank and
brought back to PMO as Secretary to Prime Minister. And steadily
Pulok would be assigned as Union Cabinet Secretary say in early next
year. He has been as a part of his official work, meeting Finance
Minister Pranab Mukherjeee, Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh
and paid a courtesy call on Sonia Gandhi recently.

He was on an official visit to review the WB projects in Bangla Desh.
Using his long distance visit, staying in Delhi for more updated
briefings on Union Budget.

Having served as District Magistrate of Rae Bareily Pulok has earned
confidence of Rajiv Gandhi and thus now Sonia Gandhi. A career
bureaucrat had handled crucial subjects in National Advisory Council.

Pulok Chatterjee was secretary Sonia Gandhi and was for five years in
PMO asAdditional Secretary to Dr Manmohan Singh

Absence of Pulok is now being felt by 7 Race Course Road and 10 Janpath
He is a close confidant of both leaders. Hence he is likely to be
asked to return to Delhi.in his mid tenure as ED of World Bank.

ends