It may be pointed out that the records of the meetings of the Ministry of Power show that although the financial institutions are keen that the Government of Madhya Pradesh agree to purchase this expensive power and provide a letter of comfort to them in this regard, there is presently no approval by the Government of Madhya Pradesh to purchase such high cost power. Any such decision by the Government of Madhya Pradesh to purchase this expensive power would be suicidal as it would mean a completely unjustifiable additional payment of Rs. 21,000 crores of public money. [Rs. 7 per unit x 823 Million units x 35 years]

The privatized Maheshwar power project,(400MW) owned by the S. Kumars group of companies, is one of the large dams being built on the river Narmada and is slated to submerge the lands and homes of over 10,000 families in 61 villages of the area. The Maheshwar Project was initially with the State government, but was privatized in 1992 and handed over to the S. Kumars group of companies.

While addressing the press conference noted lawyer Prashant Bhushan said that the case of Maheshwar dam is a clear case of corruption. Despite the unviable nature of the project and glaring financial irregularities, the public financial institutions and banks have continuously putting public money in this unviable project. He demanded a CBI enquiry into irregular public lending by the financial institutions and banks and the financial irregularities involved in the project, and registration of cases against the responsible persons under the Prevention of Corruption Act. He also demanded that the Govt. of Madhya Pradesh scrap all its agreements including its power purchase agreement with the S. Kumar’s, and not relent to any pressure to purchase high cost Maheshwar power. He also called on the financial institutions and banks not to infuse any further public money into this high cost and unviable project.

Public funds knowingly infused into unviable project

It may be noted that IFCI Reappraisal prepared on behalf of the consortium of lenders to the Maheshwar project had noted in March 2000, that the Maheshwar project, if implemented would cost at least Rs. 2254 crores. However, in April 2000, the Central Electricity Authority disallowed this proposal and approved the Maheshwar Project as techno-economically viable only at Rs. 1673 crores. Thus, it was known to the financial institutions and banks in beginning of 2000, when only Rs. 122 crores of public money had been infused into the project, that the Maheshwar project would cost more than Rs. 1673 crores and had become techno-economically unviable. However, instead of pulling back and minimizing the damage, over the next one decade, the Indian financial institutions and banks including the Power Finance Corporation, Rural Electrification Corporation, HUDCO, SBI, Bank of India, Central Bank of India, IDBI, IFCI, Central Bank of India recklessly invested over Rs. 3000 crores into this high cost and unviable private project, violating public interest and public trust and placing public money into jeopardy.

Thus in 2005, the State Government and Central governments and financial institutions gave further public funds and sovereign guarantees to the project for the resumption of work after stoppage of all project work for five years between 2001 and 2005, even though it was known to them that the project had become completely unviable. The Re-stated and Amendatory agreement dated 16.09.2005 signed by the S. Kumars companies, the Government of Madhya Pradesh and the Power Finance Corporation under the Union Ministry of Power prior to the resumption of work candidly stated: “Given the accumulated interest on the part loans raised, the resultant tariff of the project was considered too high to ensure continued project viability.”

The work on the Maheshwar Project had stopped from 2001 to 2005, because the Madhya Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation (MPSIDC) had seized the properties of the Maheshwar dam from the S.Kumars because the S. Kumars had willfully defaulted and refused to pay back loans taken from the MPSIDC. The work was also stopped because from March 2000, the financial institutions lending to the Maheshwar project stopped disbursement of public money into the Maheshwar Project, until 106.4 crores of project funds diverted by the S. Kumars to unrelated entities including its group companies was brought back, with interest.

Public Loans and guarantees given without heeding financial irregularities

The State and Central governments and the financial institutions were unwilling to heed any early warnings. Thus the Power Finance Corporation which earned the censure of the CAG of India in its Report for the year ending 2004, for investing Rs. 100 crores into the project in contravention of the powers of the Board, and without the prior infusion of equity by the promoters, refused to accept the early warning, and proceeded to invest Rs. 1250 crores into the project.

Similarly, although the S. Kumars resumed the properties of the Maheshwar Project by the means of a settlement with the MPSIDC in 2004, which it reneged on, after some payments, which was severely censured by the CAG in its Report for the year ending 2005, the Madhya Pradesh government turned a blind eye to the same. Further, although it was a condition of the Restated and Amendatory agreement dated 16th September 2005 that the MPSIDC loans willfully defaulted on by the S. Kumars be settled through an One-time settlement, the S. Kumars did not make any one time settlement with the MPSIDC, and instead, gave post dated cheques of Rs. 55 crores to the MPSIDC, which bounced when they were presented at the bank by the MPSIDC, because the bank accounts of the S. Kumars companies had meanwhile been closed. However although the State Government and the Power Finance Corporation had given guarantees to the Maheshwar Project on the basis of an One Time settlement with the MPSIDC, no steps were taken to cancel the guarantees, although the MPSIDC, which is a State owned corporation, filed 20 cases under S. 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and S.420 of the IPC against the S. Kumar’s companies, and ran from pillar to post to recover the monies.

Further, although it is RBI requirement that willful defaulters and companies facing criminal charges cannot be given any further public money and access to the capital markets, the financial institutions have provided money without any cease from 2005 onwards, little heeding that charges of cheating, criminal conspiracy, etc under S. 407, 420 467, 468. 120 B have been by filed the Economic Offences Wing of the Government of Madhya Pradesh. Similarly, although it is a RBI requirement that Directors of companies facing charges of willful default, cannot be made Directors on companies receiving public money from the financial institution, Mr. Mukul S. Kasliwal who is facing such charges is presently the Chairman of the Shree Maheshwar Hydel Power Corporation Limited. It is clear that the governments and the financial institutions have favored the S. Kumars and have given them enormous pecuniary advantage in violation of public interest, and the same warrants prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

(Courtesy: Pratirodh.com)

An increasing number of children, particularly minor girls, are being trafficked for sexual exploitation, reported local daily The Times of India Friday.

The newspaper quoted National Crime Records Bureau data as saying cases of sexual exploitation of minor girls jumped from 237 in 2009 to 679 in 2010, a 186.5 percent increase.

The eastern state of West Bengal reported 200 cases, followed by Bihar with 152 cases.

While crime against children went up by 10 percent, the corresponding figure for women stood at 4.8 percent, said the report.

A total of 26,694 cases of crimes against kids were reported in 2010, up from 24,201 cases in 2009. One hundred cases of infanticide and 111 cases of foeticide were reported last year, said the report.

With the advent of the 21st century, change has been the one dependable factor in every venture. In order to match the increasing need for improved performance, organisations have started to look within rather than just at the competition to evaluate strategies that would fulfil the ambitions they set store by.

AIESEC in Delhi University, the Delhi chapter of the largest student run organisation worldwide has provided the Capital with several innovations in terms of international exchange, social entrepreneurship and corporate events since 1984. 2011 shall see them presenting .

The HR Summit on 3rd November at The Grand- New Delhi; in an attempt to bring together HR professionals from the top companies in the city and provide them with a unique platform to discuss, deliberate and ultimately understand wholly, the human resource challenges faced by a global world. The involvement of only students from Delhi University in the inception, organisation and execution of the event makes it unprecedented, creating a larger awareness of the potential of untrained students in terms of professional interaction and management skills.
AIESEC in Delhi University has geared up to look at the various obstacles rising up in the urban work culture with a view to systematically handle each adversity thrown at this generation of leaders by the rapidly changing methods and means of operation in the corporate world. It is only fitting to have Mr. N. S. Rajan, Ex NHRD President, Partner and Global Leader- People and Organization Ernst & Young as a Keynote Speaker for such an event. Well known individuals who have made an impact on the way human resources are handled, developed and function such as Suresh Rajpal (CEO, Visnova Solutions), Akshat Rathee (CEO, Nodwin Group of Companies), Jeyadev Parthasarathy (Founder of Quadrangle Consultancy which later merged with naukri.com), Harshvendra Soin (Chief People’s Officer, Fortis Healthcare Ltd.) and Amit Bhatia (Founder & CEO, Aspire Human Capital Management) will be present at the HR Summit as panellists to give insight into international human resource management. Issues that may have been mentioned before but have hardly ever been given the time and energy that they deserve will be delved into; such as the need for internationalism, managing culture and diversity in the workplace, optimum exploitation of global talent and the delicate management of Gen Y shall be the highlight of the conclave.
The diverse audience comprising of CEOs of conglomerates, AIESEC India Board of Advisors, AIESEC in Delhi University Board of Advisors, HR professionals and select undergraduate students promises to pose interesting observations and questions to the many new concepts and theories that are expected to be unveiled at the HR Summit. The significance of networking shall be stressed upon at this conclave as it strives to provide everyone associated with it the platform to build successful business relationships by interacting with present and prospective clients, get an idea about the trends that are being talked about the most and exploit opportunities for partnerships and collaborations. The AIESEC experience is something that many corporate forces in NCR have already had a taste of, and for those who haven’t, the HR Summit will provide information and enable them to interact with partners of the organisation to learn more about the impact AIESEC has had on the corporate world.
This gathering shall also provide companies the opportunity to understand the scope and magnitude of the internships provided by AIESEC in Delhi University and the network thus created. This event hopes to bring together diverse and even conflicting opinions onto a neutral ground and help create an amalgamation of the great ideas that have led change in the 21st century and thus create more options for the rising generation. The common belief that the future will be what the present youth wants it to be like cannot be ignored and will receive the attention it deserves, along with inputs from the carefully selected student delegates at the event. The HR Summit hopes to not only leave an impact on the ways in which units interact, but also make them aware of how no interaction is complete without a future based projection, which can only be possible when the future of the unit itself is adding to it constructively.

Meanwhile, Sahil was called by proctor office where Jamia Proctor Prof. Masud Alam has discussed and inquired many of his activities.

According to Sahil, the proctor expressed his sympathy for the cause of students union but cited many ‘practical problems’, which according to Afroz, are unfounded.

Disappointed Afroz has once again requested Jamia VC in another letter to intervene in the matter and ensure students’’ union election without delay. Jamia students are increasingly coming in support of restoration of students union without delay.

Sahil said that his letter has received wide support among students and academicians. Academic community and student organizations across the country are coming in the support for students union in all colleges and universities including Jamia Millia Islamia.

Forum members are meeting with academicians and professors for wider support for the students’ union. A meeting of forum has been called tomorrow to discuss the matter and decide the future course of struggle.

New Delhi: Senior lawyer and social activist Shanti Bhushan has expressed his willingness to defend arrested Gujarat IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt in the Supreme Court if the latter approached him.

“If that case comes to the Supreme Court, if Sanjiv Bhatt needs to hire a lawyer, and if he approaches me, then I will defend him against Gujarat government. We have been opposing communalism. We have always opposed Narendra Modi’s and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) line of thinking,” Bhushan told reporters here.

He further rubbished claims that he was working to help the BJP or the RSS.

“If anybody says that we are helping BJP or RSS is completely wrong. It is complete lie. We should not take cognizance of it,” added Bhushan.

Bhatt, who had accused Narendra Modi of misusing the State machinery during the post-Godhra riots, was arrested on September 30 in connection with a complaint regarding coercion of a subordinate.

He was arrested on a complaint filed by constable K D Pant, who worked as a subordinate with Bhatt in the state Intelligence Bureau.

According to Pant’s complaint, Bhatt had forced him to file an affidavit in which Modi had been named.

Bhatt has been locked in a public confrontation with Modi after he had filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court accusing the Chief Minister of complicity in the 2002 riots.

New Delhi: Students of Central University of Jamia Millia Islamia, under the banner of Forum For Students Democracy, have written a letter to University Administration demanding student’s union Elections.

The letter also questions inability of university in providing basic democratic rights to the students.

The letter states students must not be deprived of democratic space and exercise. They must not be rendered politically backward. Recent revolutions in the Arab World and anti-corruption uprising in India have proved that the youth have a constructive role to play in the society, best contribution for their country and it is just a matter of allowing them space and facilitate their political participation.

Questioning the University administration for not allowing students to form student’s union the letter says, ”violation of our basic right to form students union in our colleges and universities, does not only isolate Muslim community in India’s vibrant democratic space but also restrict their opportunities to prove their ability and skills to contribute to the nation building process.”

It should be noted that Student Union elections have not taken place in JMI for years while JNU and DU elections are proving national political platform to students and giving them opportunities to make career in politics.

The letter says that the Forum For Student Democracy will launch a movement in University if the demands are not met. So far University has kept its silence on this issue.

The impact of peaceful and democratic movements across the world is visible in this university, recently declared a ‘minority’ institution.

New Delhi: The first Prof. Iqbal Ansari Memorial Lecture will be held on 13^th of October in Delhi at India Islamic Culture Centre (IICC). Eminent social activist, writer and member of National Advisory Council (NAC), Harsh Mandar will be delivering the lecture on the topic of ‘Communal Violence in India: Ending Impunity?’

Prof. Iqbal Ansari was a pioneering Minority Rights’ Activist, who passed away on 13^th October 2009. He was one of the most visible civil liberties’ activists in India, taking up a variety issues, from communalism, religious freedom and communal harmony to minority rights. A teacher of English literature turned in to a whole time human rights’ activist, Prof. Iqbal Ansari along with another well-known civil libertarian like V M Tarkunde, Justice Rajendra Sachchar championed the protection of civil rights in India. He was also author of several books.

The meeting will presided by eminent Political Scientist, Author and Dean, School of Social Sciences, JNU, Prof. Zoya Hasan. On this occasion Prof. Manorajan Mohanthy, Academic and Civil Rights Activist, Dr. John Dayal, Senior Journalist and Human Rights’ Activist, and Dr. Zafarul Islam Khan, Editor in Chief, the Milli Gazette, will be paying tributes to Iqbal Ansari.

For further details contact: Mahtab Alam, 9811209345 (activist.journalist@gmail.com)

New Delhi: In exercise of the powers conferred by the sub-section (2) of section 5 of the Press Council Act, 1978 (37 of 1978), the central government yesterday notified the nomination of Justice Markandey Katju, retired judge of the Supreme Court of India, as the chairman of the Press Council of India.

Katju was born on September 20, 1946, in a Kashmiri Brahmin family. He topped the merit list of the Allahabad University’s LLB examination of 1968. Thereafter, he practiced law in the Allahabad High Court specializing in Labour Law, Taxation and Writ Petitions. He is keenly interested in academics and has a wide range of interests, including Sanskrit, Urdu, History, Philosophy, Science, Sociology etc., apart from his interest in Jurisprudence.

After practicising law in the Allahabad High Court, Justice Markandey Katju was appointed judge of the Allahabad High Court in 1991, as its acting Chief Justice in August 2004. He was also the chief justice of Madras High Court in November 2004. He became the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court in October in 2005. He was appointed as the judge of the Supreme Court in April 2006 and retired on September 19, 2011.

While serving as the chief justice of the Madras High Court, Justice Katju spoke about judges initiating “Contempt of Court” proceedings. His view was that the authority of judges rests on public confidence and not on the power of contempt.

Justice Katju’s judgments are considered bold, insightful and occasionally controversial. In January 2009, Hearing a petition filed by Archbishop Raphael Cheenath about violence against Christians in Orissa, Katju observed, “We can’t tolerate persecution of religious minorities. If your government cannot control such incidents, then quit office.” The bench directed the government to provide adequate security and compensation to the aggrieved parties.

Justice Markandey Katju addressing the gathering at Silver Jubilee Celebration of Institute of Objective Studies (IOS) in New Delhi. (Photo source: IndianMuslim Observer)

In July 2009, Justice Katju apologised for commenting, during the hearing of a case, that students cannot insist on wearing beards as this would lead to the “Talibanisation” of India. The comment led to much controversy and Justice Katju and Justice Raveendran later withdrew the related order, stating: “During the hearing, certain observations were made by one of us. His intentions were not to offend anyone. However, if any one’s feeling has been hurt, he apologises and expresses regret in the matter.”

In Prafull Goradia vs Union of India, a bench of the Supreme Court comprising also of Justice Katju, dismissed petitioner’s claim that Hajj subsidies provided by the Government of India were unconstitutional. The bench observed that, “the object of Article 27 is to maintain secularism, and hence we must construe it from that angle.”

In November 2010, in a strong indictment of a Judge of the Allahabad High Court for passing orders on extraneous considerations, Justice Katju directed the chief justice of the high court to take action against the judge concerned, and some other judges facing complaints. Making a reference to Shakespeare, Katju famously noted that “something is rotten in the Allahabad High Court.” The observation was contested by the Allahabad High Court, but the Supreme Court refused to expunge the remark.

On March 8, 2011, Katju delivered a “landmark” judgement legalizing passive euthanasia or withdrawal of life-support systems for patients who are brain dead or in a permanent vegetative state and whom doctors have lost hope of reviving even with the most advanced medical aid. The detailed process of passive euthanasia includes strict guidelines that must be met, including a case by case review of medical condition by a team of court appointed doctors and prior approval of the high court.

The Judge further observed that the Section 309 of the Indian Penal Code, according to which attempt to suicide is a criminal offence, was archaic and needed review. He said, “A person attempts suicide in a depression, and hence he needs help rather than punishment. We, therefore, recommend to Parliament to consider the feasibility of deleting the Section 309 from the Indian Penal Code.” The judgement received widespread commendation as “brave”, well-researched and “path breaking.”

On May 13, 2011, a Supreme Court bench involving Justice Katju said that fake encounters are nothing but cold-blooded brutal murders, which should be treated as the rarest of rare cases and that police personnel responsible for it should be awarded death sentence.

The observation was made while rejecting bail to Mumbai policemen involved in the fake encounter at Nana-Nani Park at Versova. A similar observation was made while hearing the fake encounter case of an alleged gangster by the Rajasthan Police on October 23, 2006.

On June 17, 2011, Katju made a personal appeal to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to release on “humanitarian grounds” Khalil Chishty, an elderly Pakistani virologist in Indian prison since 1992. Justice Katju expressed fear that if Chishty is not released forthwith, he may die in the jail by the time his appeal is decided by the Rajasthan High Court.

The move did not appear to go down well with the main opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which found as “odd” the appeal to free 80-year-old Chishty, a murder convict. “It is odd that an SC judge is writing to the prime minister for securing the release of a Pakistani prisoner, even in his individual capacity,” BJP spokesman Ravi Shankar Prasad said.

However, other than the BJP, his appeal found widespread support in India. Given the response, the prime minister instructed the home minister to examine the request of Justice Katju.

The background Katju (65) is noteworthy because of his family’s achievements in the fields of law and politics. His father late Justice S N Katju was a former judge of the Allahabad High Court and his grandfather Dr Kailash Nath Katju was one of India’s leading lawyers and participated in the country’s freedom movement. Dr K N Katju was the chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, the governor of West Bengal and Orissa as well as the union law, home and defence minister.

Justice Markandey Katju has written several books, which include publications such as ‘Law in the Scientific Era’, ‘Interpretation of Taxing Statutes’, ‘Mimansa Rules of Interpretation’, and ‘Domestic Enquiry’.

New Delhi: Whistle-blower IPS officer Sanjeev Bhatt will have to spend two more nights in jail as a court in Ahmedabad today deferred the hearing on his bail plea till October 7 (Friday).

Earlier, in a setback to the Gujarat government, a local court had rejected its application against arrested IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt and said it would hear his bail plea.

Gujarat government had opposed the hearing on the grounds that Bhatt’s revision remand application was pending.

Session Judge V K Vyas said he was of the opinion that Bhatt’s bail application should be heard, even if the remand application was pending in another court.

In an unusual move, G N Patel, principal district judge of Ahmedabad district court, on Tuesday had informally suggested “a compromise formula” to suspended IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt while hearing a government revision application seeking his remand.

He proposed that Bhatt go on police remand for about three-four hours, “answer all their questions” and then get released on bail in the evening.

Bhatt rejected the proposal outright, telling the court: “If you pass a judicial order on my remand, I’m ready to go to police custody for 14 days. But I will not go with the police even for four minutes by striking a compromise. I will not strike a compromise with liars and criminals.”

His fight was on principles, he added.

The suspended officer was arrested on September 30 for allegedly forcing a Gujarat Police constable, KD Pant, to sign a false affidavit.

Bhatt had claimed in the affidavit that Pant was at a meeting in which Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi gave instructions to the police to go easy on a rioting mob in 2002 following the burning of a coach of the Sabarmati Express train near Godhra station.

However, Pant later claimed that he was in Mumbai when Modi allegedly chaired the February 27, 2002 meeting.

The IPS officer, who had accused Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi of complicity in 2002 post-Godhra riots, was arrested on September 30 following a complaint by a police constable, K D Pant, who had worked under him during the 2002 riots.

The police had raided his residence twice within 24 hours to look for ‘false affidavits’.

On October 1, Bhatt’s wife Shweta had alleged the police harassment while claiming that no one was allowed to meet him. On the same date, Ahmedabad court dismissed the police remand extension and sent Bhatt to judicial custody.

Shweta also wrote a letter to Union Home Minister P Chidambaram seeking his intervention in ensuring the safety and the liberty of her husband. She had expressed fear that more false cases might be slapped against Sanjeev Bhatt.

Earlier on Saturday, Bhatt’s wife had alleged that he was under threat. Following this, the Union Home Ministry yesterday directed the Gujarat Police to ensure the safety of Bhatt and his family.

New Delhi: A court in Ahmedabad has ruled that arrested police officer Sanjiv Bhatt is entitled to apply for bail, NDTV reported.  The Gujarat Police had challenged this on the grounds that it has filed a parallel case that asks for Bhatt’s custody.

Whether Bhatt leaves jail will be decided later today.

He was arrested on Friday for coercing a constable to back his testimony against Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi. Bhatt has filed an affidavit in the Supreme Court, alleging Modi of complicity in the riots that took place in Gujarat in 2002. As part of his affidavit, Bhatt included a statement made by D K Pant, a junior officer. Pant’s statement supported Bhatt’s claim that he was present at a meeting on February 27, 2002 when Modi asked senior policemen to go slow on rioters. Other policemen who attended that meeting on record have said Bhatt was not present. Pant’s statement said the opposite.

Later, Pant said that he had been threatened by Bhatt into supporting him.

A judge hearing Bhatt’s case for bail asked yesterday if he was willing to allow the police access to his bank lockers. The judge suggested that could help Bhatt get bail. However, the police officer refused. “There can be no compromise with the Modi government. This is a battle of principles. I am ready to remain in jail for however long it takes,” he told the court.

Bhatt was suspended from the police force in August for skipping work. The Congress party and activists in Gujarat accuse the Modi government of using the state machinery to persecute the police officer.