18 Apr 2012 04:04:09 PM IST
Tatra truck deal case: CBI raids two places in Noida
NEW DELHI: The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Wednesday conducted search operations at the homes of two former army officers in Delhi and Noida and recovered key documents related to its probe into alleged irregularities in the procurement of Tatra trucks, sources said.
CBI sources said searches were also being conducted at the residence of an official of the Britain-based Vectra group that supplies the all-terrain heavy duty Tatra trucks to the Indian Army through defence public sector undertaking Bharat Earth Movers Ltd. (BEML).
The sources said raids were conducted at the homes of Brig (retd) P.C. Das in Delhi and Col (retd) Anil Datta in Noida. Searches were also conducted at the home of Vectra employee Anil Mansaramani.
The sources said three teams of CBI sleuths conducted the searches that began early Wednesday morning. Some crucial documents expected to help in investigating the scam-tainted truck deal have been found, the sources claimed.
The CBI search operations come a day after the agency questioned three people, including former BEML director V. Mohan, the company's present chief V.R.S. Natarajan and Vectra group chief Ravinder Rishi, in connection with alleged lapses in the supply of Tatra trucks.
Tatra is a Czech manufacturer and owned by Britain's Vectra that supplies truck parts to BEML.
BEML assembles the trucks and sells them off to the army. Some 7,000 Tatra trucks have been bought by the army since 1986.
Army chief Gen V.K. Singh blew the lid off the alleged scam after he alleged in March that he'd been offered a Rs.14 crore bribe to clear a deal for supplying sub-standard Tatra trucks.
The army in a March 5 press release took the names of Tatra and BEML, alleging that Lt Gen (retd) Tejinder Singh had offered a bribe on behalf of Tatra and Vectra.
The agency was probing why BEML decided to procure Tatra parts from Tatra Sipox (Britain), a private company, from 1997 when it was doing so through Omnipol (a state-owned unit in Czech Republic) since 1986.
The sources said CBI was trying to find out why BEML officials signed an agreement with Tatra Sipox (Britain) in a hurried manner June 14, 1997 in Bangalore, three days after they had a meeting with the firm and its associate companies' officials in Slovakia.
One more company, Venus Projects Ltd., in which Rishi allegedly has some stakes, was under the CBI scanner as he allegedly used it for purchasing spare parts for Tatra trucks, they said.
Tatra deal: CBI raids ex-Army officers' houses
The CBI team raided the residence of Anil Mansharamani, A-23, Sector 36 a businessman and also searched the house of Mr. O.P. Dutta a resident of C-75, Sector 30 whom the CBI suspect to be involved in the multi crore rupees deal.
Tatra a multi crore scam
Comment: CBI should make less noise and arrest the culprits before evidence vanishes... once the ExServicemen turns approver the main criminal mastermind can be nailed.
Showing posts with label Political Appointment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Political Appointment. Show all posts
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Sunday, April 15, 2012
How President and Politicians grab Military Land? A viscious cycle
National Security at Stake...
President’s office only sanctioned repairs to two bungalows; the President defied this, April 13, 2012 07:17 PM | Vinita Deshmukh
This bungalow in Khadki Cantonment area near Pune was taken over and later demolished
RTI documents reveal an official communication to President Pratibha Patil that new construction is “not the right option".
In reaction to our report on how President Pratibha Patil has grabbed defence land, far in excess of her entitlement to build a palatial post-retirement residence, we now have further documents and photographs to show how two bungalows was commandeered for the President for demolition and reconstruction.
Things began moving when Pratibha Patil opted for Pune as her home after retirement. “The president has expressed her desire to settle down in Pune, Maharashtra on completion of her tenure on 25 July 2012. Keeping that in mind, Bungalow no 38 and 26A which are contagiously located within the Defence Cantonment area on Bombay-Pune Road have been identified.’’
Interestingly, the President’s office in that letter had taken the line that the bungalows should be only repaired and not demolished for construction of a new one, as recently February 1, 2011. However, almost in the same breath it also finds a specious way to justify allocation of property in excess of the eligibility of house accommodation for a President, post-retirement, when the intention was apparently quite different.
A letter written by Dr Christy Fernandez, secretary to the President of India, to home secretary GK Pillai on 11 February 2011 (obtained by activists), states that any new construction is “not the right option as it would not operationally be convenient and aesthetically acceptable.” Hence, the letter suggested that the next bungalow no 26A be used for office purposes.
This bungalow in Khadki Cantonment area near Pune was taken over and later demolished
RTI documents reveal an official communication to President Pratibha Patil that new construction is “not the right option’’
In reaction to our report on how President Pratibha Patil has grabbed defence land, far in excess of her entitlement to build a palatial post-retirement residence, we now have further documents and photographs to show how two bungalows was commandeered for the President for demolition and reconstruction.
Things began moving when Pratibha Patil opted for Pune as her home after retirement. “The president has expressed her desire to settle down in Pune, Maharashtra on completion of her tenure on 25 July 2012. Keeping that in mind, Bungalow no 38 and 26A which are contagiously located within the Defence Cantonment area on Bombay-Pune Road have been identified.’’
Interestingly, the President’s office in that letter had taken the line that the bungalows should be only repaired and not demolished for construction of a new one, as recently February 1, 2011. However, almost in the same breath it also finds a specious way to justify allocation of property in excess of the eligibility of house accommodation for a President, post-retirement, when the intention was apparently quite different.
A letter written by Dr Christy Fernandez, secretary to the President of India, to home secretary GK Pillai on 11 February 2011 (obtained by activists), states that any new construction is “not the right option as it would not operationally be convenient and aesthetically acceptable.” Hence, the letter suggested that the next bungalow no 26A be used for office purposes.
As per the inspection site report of the Defence Estate Office done on 23 and 24 June 2011, bungalow No 38, which has been acquired, itself has open space of around 3.40 acres which amount to 1.48 lakh odd sq ft. This by itself exceeds the eligibility criteria of house accommodation for a retired President. According to the home ministry’s rulebook, this should not exceed 4,498 sq ft. Nevertheless, bungalow No 26A was also requisitioned on the claim that it would be required for office purposes, if No 38 were not demolished. That bungalow, as per the site inspection reports rests on 2.10 acres of land. So the total area allocated to the President is 5.5 acres, which is 2.42 lakh sq ft. That is official now, thanks to documents procured under the RTI Act, from the President's office and the Defence Estate Office in Pune.
Mr Fernandez, a loyal official, makes a case for the President needing more space in the letter to the Mr Pillai with this argument, “The bungalow No 38 does not have adequate space to set up the office and the related facilities required to be provided to a former President. Creating this extra facility in Bungalow No 38 would amount to additional construction to the existing building, which may not be the right option as it would not be operationally convenient and aesthetically acceptable. Hence, the request for using the adjacent vacant building for the purpose of setting up office, etc.
The letter continues to reiterate the aspect of repairs. It states, "Special repairs required prior to occupancy of the building and its subsequent regular maintenance and upkeep will have to be undertaken by the Defence establishment itself, as it would be administratively and operationally convenient to do so... It is necessary to take up the matter straightaway since the civil work involved will be time consuming as the building require heavy repairs particularly the one which remains unoccupied."
Bungalow No 38 was, until a few months being used as an official accommodation for a military officer. There is nothing wrong if this is given to the President as she or he is entitled to an existing government accommodation. However, it is a mystery how the argument made against demolition of an existing bungalow is used to usurp another one and then both are demolished to start a brand new construction. The letter from the President’s office, clearly seeks that the bungalow be vacated for repairs: "It is understood that Bungalow No 38 is presently occupied by the Commandant Works, Bombay Engineering Group and Centre (The Bombay Sappers) while Bungalow No 26A is presently lying unoccupied."
The matter was informally discussed with the Defence authorities who are inclined to allow the use of these buildings for the suggested purpose without any change of their ownership. Hence the matter may please be taken up with the Ministry of Defence for timely vacation of the premises to carry out requisite repairs to render them befitting for occupation on completion of the tenure of the President.
And so the mystery of the new construction has still to be unravelled. The ownership of one of the two bungalows is also a separate story.
Click here for the original post
President’s office only sanctioned repairs to two bungalows; the President defied this, April 13, 2012 07:17 PM | Vinita Deshmukh
RTI documents reveal an official communication to President Pratibha Patil that new construction is “not the right option".
In reaction to our report on how President Pratibha Patil has grabbed defence land, far in excess of her entitlement to build a palatial post-retirement residence, we now have further documents and photographs to show how two bungalows was commandeered for the President for demolition and reconstruction.
Things began moving when Pratibha Patil opted for Pune as her home after retirement. “The president has expressed her desire to settle down in Pune, Maharashtra on completion of her tenure on 25 July 2012. Keeping that in mind, Bungalow no 38 and 26A which are contagiously located within the Defence Cantonment area on Bombay-Pune Road have been identified.’’
Interestingly, the President’s office in that letter had taken the line that the bungalows should be only repaired and not demolished for construction of a new one, as recently February 1, 2011. However, almost in the same breath it also finds a specious way to justify allocation of property in excess of the eligibility of house accommodation for a President, post-retirement, when the intention was apparently quite different.
A letter written by Dr Christy Fernandez, secretary to the President of India, to home secretary GK Pillai on 11 February 2011 (obtained by activists), states that any new construction is “not the right option as it would not operationally be convenient and aesthetically acceptable.” Hence, the letter suggested that the next bungalow no 26A be used for office purposes.
This bungalow in Khadki Cantonment area near Pune was taken over and later demolished
RTI documents reveal an official communication to President Pratibha Patil that new construction is “not the right option’’
In reaction to our report on how President Pratibha Patil has grabbed defence land, far in excess of her entitlement to build a palatial post-retirement residence, we now have further documents and photographs to show how two bungalows was commandeered for the President for demolition and reconstruction.
Things began moving when Pratibha Patil opted for Pune as her home after retirement. “The president has expressed her desire to settle down in Pune, Maharashtra on completion of her tenure on 25 July 2012. Keeping that in mind, Bungalow no 38 and 26A which are contagiously located within the Defence Cantonment area on Bombay-Pune Road have been identified.’’
Interestingly, the President’s office in that letter had taken the line that the bungalows should be only repaired and not demolished for construction of a new one, as recently February 1, 2011. However, almost in the same breath it also finds a specious way to justify allocation of property in excess of the eligibility of house accommodation for a President, post-retirement, when the intention was apparently quite different.
A letter written by Dr Christy Fernandez, secretary to the President of India, to home secretary GK Pillai on 11 February 2011 (obtained by activists), states that any new construction is “not the right option as it would not operationally be convenient and aesthetically acceptable.” Hence, the letter suggested that the next bungalow no 26A be used for office purposes.
As per the inspection site report of the Defence Estate Office done on 23 and 24 June 2011, bungalow No 38, which has been acquired, itself has open space of around 3.40 acres which amount to 1.48 lakh odd sq ft. This by itself exceeds the eligibility criteria of house accommodation for a retired President. According to the home ministry’s rulebook, this should not exceed 4,498 sq ft. Nevertheless, bungalow No 26A was also requisitioned on the claim that it would be required for office purposes, if No 38 were not demolished. That bungalow, as per the site inspection reports rests on 2.10 acres of land. So the total area allocated to the President is 5.5 acres, which is 2.42 lakh sq ft. That is official now, thanks to documents procured under the RTI Act, from the President's office and the Defence Estate Office in Pune.
Mr Fernandez, a loyal official, makes a case for the President needing more space in the letter to the Mr Pillai with this argument, “The bungalow No 38 does not have adequate space to set up the office and the related facilities required to be provided to a former President. Creating this extra facility in Bungalow No 38 would amount to additional construction to the existing building, which may not be the right option as it would not be operationally convenient and aesthetically acceptable. Hence, the request for using the adjacent vacant building for the purpose of setting up office, etc.
The letter continues to reiterate the aspect of repairs. It states, "Special repairs required prior to occupancy of the building and its subsequent regular maintenance and upkeep will have to be undertaken by the Defence establishment itself, as it would be administratively and operationally convenient to do so... It is necessary to take up the matter straightaway since the civil work involved will be time consuming as the building require heavy repairs particularly the one which remains unoccupied."
Bungalow No 38 was, until a few months being used as an official accommodation for a military officer. There is nothing wrong if this is given to the President as she or he is entitled to an existing government accommodation. However, it is a mystery how the argument made against demolition of an existing bungalow is used to usurp another one and then both are demolished to start a brand new construction. The letter from the President’s office, clearly seeks that the bungalow be vacated for repairs: "It is understood that Bungalow No 38 is presently occupied by the Commandant Works, Bombay Engineering Group and Centre (The Bombay Sappers) while Bungalow No 26A is presently lying unoccupied."
The matter was informally discussed with the Defence authorities who are inclined to allow the use of these buildings for the suggested purpose without any change of their ownership. Hence the matter may please be taken up with the Ministry of Defence for timely vacation of the premises to carry out requisite repairs to render them befitting for occupation on completion of the tenure of the President.
And so the mystery of the new construction has still to be unravelled. The ownership of one of the two bungalows is also a separate story.
Click here for the original post
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
PM in a fix: To punish the corrupt advisors or not?
2G order: PM wants to know whether his officers should be punished
Sunil Prabhu, Updated: February 08, 2012 17:14 IST
New Delhi: The Prime Minister wants to know if any members of his office need to be penalized as a consequence of a recent Supreme Court verdict on the telecom scam. In its verdict, the court pulled up the Prime Minister's Office, and also recommended that the government consider a four-month deadline for responding to requests to prosecute government servants on charges of corruption. Dr Manmohan Singh has asked Attorney General GE Vahanvati to advise him within a week on whether the government should, in a review petition, ask the Supreme Court to reconsider its verdict.
On January 31, the court ruled that the Prime Minister's Office was wrong to have taken nearly 16 months to respond to a request by Subramaniam Swamy that asked for permission to prosecute former telecom minister A Raja in connection with the 2G scam. Mr Swamy sent in his request in November 2008. He finally took the government to court. The law makes it necessary for the Prime Minister to sanction the prosecution of a union minister.
The Supreme Court said, "The concerned officers in the Prime Minister's Office kept the matter pending and then took the shelter of the fact that the CBI had registered the case and the investigation was pending." However, it was much gentler on Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, saying that he "is not expected to personally look into the minute details of every case placed before him and has to depend on his advisers and other officers." (Read: Verdict gentle on PM, tough on his advisors)
Though the court did not mention any names, the PM has asked the Attorney General if he is expected to take any action against those who were his closest aides at the time.
2G order: PM wants to know whether his officers should be punished
Comment: Where is the need to seek SC clarification when the corrupt advisors logically need to punished for their omissions and commissions!
Sunil Prabhu, Updated: February 08, 2012 17:14 IST
New Delhi: The Prime Minister wants to know if any members of his office need to be penalized as a consequence of a recent Supreme Court verdict on the telecom scam. In its verdict, the court pulled up the Prime Minister's Office, and also recommended that the government consider a four-month deadline for responding to requests to prosecute government servants on charges of corruption. Dr Manmohan Singh has asked Attorney General GE Vahanvati to advise him within a week on whether the government should, in a review petition, ask the Supreme Court to reconsider its verdict.
On January 31, the court ruled that the Prime Minister's Office was wrong to have taken nearly 16 months to respond to a request by Subramaniam Swamy that asked for permission to prosecute former telecom minister A Raja in connection with the 2G scam. Mr Swamy sent in his request in November 2008. He finally took the government to court. The law makes it necessary for the Prime Minister to sanction the prosecution of a union minister.
The Supreme Court said, "The concerned officers in the Prime Minister's Office kept the matter pending and then took the shelter of the fact that the CBI had registered the case and the investigation was pending." However, it was much gentler on Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, saying that he "is not expected to personally look into the minute details of every case placed before him and has to depend on his advisers and other officers." (Read: Verdict gentle on PM, tough on his advisors)
Though the court did not mention any names, the PM has asked the Attorney General if he is expected to take any action against those who were his closest aides at the time.
2G order: PM wants to know whether his officers should be punished
Comment: Where is the need to seek SC clarification when the corrupt advisors logically need to punished for their omissions and commissions!
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Strong Lokpal bill in the offing: Antony
Tuesday, November 08, 2011, 22:56
Thiruvananthapuram: Defence Minister AK Antony on Tuesday said the government will bring out a "strong" Lokpal bill wherein it will become difficult for anyone in position to work without accountability.
All those who work in public life would have to surrender to the rule of law and subjected to the scrutiny of social auditing, he said at a function here.
"Ministers, MLAs, judiciary, officials, businessmen and media persons will have to stand before the scrutiny of people and have to be accountable to people," he said.
"No one can run away from it," Antony said, adding all should prepare themselves to face the change.
Noting that Right to Information Act was only a beginning, he said it was going to be extended to many more areas. Antony said role of media in the present context was very important.
As a matter of caution, he said media also should subject themselves for criticism and self introspection. Media could influence the society and so, the reports they file should not be unilateral.
"While giving breaking news, media should also think about its consequences," he said. PTI
Strong Lokpal bill in the offing: Antony
Thiruvananthapuram: Defence Minister AK Antony on Tuesday said the government will bring out a "strong" Lokpal bill wherein it will become difficult for anyone in position to work without accountability.
All those who work in public life would have to surrender to the rule of law and subjected to the scrutiny of social auditing, he said at a function here.
"Ministers, MLAs, judiciary, officials, businessmen and media persons will have to stand before the scrutiny of people and have to be accountable to people," he said.
"No one can run away from it," Antony said, adding all should prepare themselves to face the change.
Noting that Right to Information Act was only a beginning, he said it was going to be extended to many more areas. Antony said role of media in the present context was very important.
As a matter of caution, he said media also should subject themselves for criticism and self introspection. Media could influence the society and so, the reports they file should not be unilateral.
"While giving breaking news, media should also think about its consequences," he said. PTI
Strong Lokpal bill in the offing: Antony
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Tainted Brigadier Appointed Director of Sainik Welfare
Plum post for "tainted" Brig: Shady past- Indicated by court of Inquiry, he is set to join as sainik welfare director
Army serves 'severe displeasure' to brigadier
Press Trust Of India
New Delhi, October 29, 2010
click here to read the article
Press Trust Of India
New Delhi, October 29, 2010
click here to read the article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
