10. The Super Cabinet and the Inner Mind of Mr. A.B. Vajpayee

10

THE FALL OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

Mr. S.P. Puruvar, Finance Director of the Re. 68000 crore BSNL, quit his position on 1 April 2002.

 The exit of Mr. Puruwar was linked to the quick closure of the negotiations with the vendors, who supplied certain equipment to the BSNL.

On the same day, a hurriedly convened meeting of the Union Cabinet decided to bar the Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) from buying anything exceeding Re.5 crore from any foreign company without the clearance from the Union Cabinet. Mr. Manohar Josi of Siva Sena Party announced it. He stumbled for words while announcing this to the newsmen. The print media, for obvious reasons, did not publish it.

The above developments confirmed that the system was engaged in large-scale manipulations through all possible ways.

Protesting against privatization almost all employees of all PSUs - including banks and insurance- went on a nationwide strike on 16April 2002. On the next day, the letter No.9 was sent to Mr. K.R. Narayanan, His Excellency the President of India.

The above letter pointed out the existence of an unknown Super Cabinet at New Delhi. The reason for this conclusion was that the public sector Hindustan Zinc Limited (HZL) was given to the Sterlite, which had been disqualified by the Union Cabinet based on the letter dated 1-6-2002 (First letter) of this writer.

The copy of this letter was not sent to Mr. A.B. Vajpayee, Prime Minister of India, as Mr. K.R.Narayanan had been transmitting the letters to him. The practice of sending the letters to the Chief Ministers and the learned judges of the Supreme Court was also discontinued for some time due to practical difficulties. The letter follows.

From

          V. Sabarimuthu,

          Thattankonam,

          Vellicode, Mulagumoodu, 629167.

To

          Mr. K.R. Naraynan

      His Excellency the President of India,

Presidential Palace,

          New Delhi.

Your Excellency,

    Kindly consider the REASONS FOR THE FALL OF OUR CONSTITUTION.

1. The Supreme Court has extinguished socialism from the Constitution. The shoulders of the learned judges of the Supreme Court must be broad enough to accept our Constitution even if they cannot relish it. Sovereignty, Socialism, Secularism and Democracy cannot be destroyed by any judgment even if it is reinforced by 100 other judgments. In other words, the Constitution is supreme and not the judgments. Whether the Supreme Court has any power to annihilate socialism and, therefore, the Preamble through its judgments is the crucial question, which remains unanswered. 

2. The words socialism and secularism were included in the Constitution because of great foresight and political will that stemmed from due democratic process. Therefore, destruction of socialism amounts to destruction of democracy through the back door.

3. Several cases pending against big economic offenders had been brought to the notice of the President of India, Chief Justice of India, many learned judges of the Supreme Court and the CBI. Nevertheless, no effort has been taken by anyone to bring anyone to justice. This included the cases that the Supreme Court had threatened to monitor directly. It was the Supreme Court, which showed to the common man that the cases against big economic offenders too could be pursued without much bias. Naturally, the common man expects the Supreme Court to implement its own observations in the open court.

4. On September 9, 1996, Justice Y.K. Sabbarwal and Justice D.K. Jain of the High Court, Delhi observed, “Considering the very nature of the allegation, this seems to be the most important case, (i.e. JMM case), the nation is facing. There can be no other case in Parliamentary Democracy more important than this”. People believed what the learned judges said. Now they anticipate the verdict of the Supreme Court in this case. The JMM money is still in the bank. The CBI has not filed an appeal in this case and in some other cases presumably because the critical energy badly needed to file an appeal is not forthcoming from the President, Prime Minister or the Supreme Court.

5. The High Courts were not allowed to hear the BALCO case. The Chief Justice S.P.Bharucha did not allow the High Court, Chennai to hear the ITDC case.  Justice B.N. Kirpal-this is considered as the most important point- was asked to head the benches that heard the BALCO case at least twice. Taking cases from the High Courts, in good faith, is common. However, this should not appear as something done in bad faith. Not all the safety valves available to the affected people should be firmly shut. The logical extension of this trend is that the Chief Justices and Judges of the High Courts would be appointed with an eye on acquitting the accused. Therefore, the people all over India fear that the days are not far off when all big offenders would be coming out with flying colours and added glory.                                                                    

6. It is well known that Mr. Tata, who had been spending Re. hundred of crore for Keten Parek related activities, took Re.850 crore from the BoI to purchase the VSNL. The matter was informed to the President of India, the Chief Justice of India and the CBI. The CBI has not denied the allegation.  The CBI has not caught the culprits partly because the CBI-it appears- is not purely independent in its functioning and partly because of the present environment. It is strange that a solid complaint against him involving Re.850 crore is sidelined. The public servants, who influenced the BoI to pay the money to Mr. Tata have the last laugh. Absence of rule of law is evident.

7. In July 2001, the Union Cabinet - in good faith - decided to disqualify the companies that committed grave offences from bidding for the PSUs. The grave offence was defined as one, which outrages the moral sense of the community. Based on this definition the then bidders of Air India and HZL were totally disqualified.  Obviously, this definition could be reversed only in bad faith. The Constitution could be defied. The President of India could be defied. The common man could be defied.  How can the Union Cabinet defy its own decision? It is possible because, it appears, that a “Super Cabinet” is functioning somewhere in Delhi. The members of this Super Cabinet periodically decide to divide the PSUs among themselves as if they were their family properties.  If it were not true, HZL would not have been given to the Sterlite, a company disqualified by the Union Cabinet for the above reason. It was the reason why the Chief Justice of India was requested not to follow the crowd.  The Chief Justice of India could have stayed the disinvestments for the violation of these guidelines, if not based on the Constitution. In fact, these companies committed offences, which outraged the moral sense of not only the community but also the Government. One must make money honestly to make the nation rich. It is evident that the nation is under the clutches of the economic offenders. The Supreme Court could have contributed its share to extricate the nation from their hands.

8. The President of India has not given any reply to not less than five letters written to him on Constitutional matters. The President of India, it appears, paid a visit to the Supreme Court in vain.  The President of India must be always pleased to certify that the learned judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts enjoy his pleasure because the Preamble of the Constitution is safe in their hands.

9. If the learned judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts  act in good faith, there would be no threat to socialism, democracy, rule of law or to the life and security of the people. On the contrary, if they begin to act in bad faith, there would be a real threat to socialism, democracy, and secularism, rule of law and life and security of the people. Absence of a reply from the President of India indicates that the latter is happening.

10.If a judicial blunder is pointed out, the Supreme Court must come out of it with necessary corrections without wasting time. What is important is the Constitution and not the procedures and technicalities.  There is a new hope that all the privatized PSUs would be taken back to meet the demands of the Constitution.  The Chief Justice of India would agree wholeheartedly our people must enjoy the benefits of the Preamble as a matter of unfettered right and not as gratis. Therefore, this letter may kindly be treated as a writ petition to restore the status quo ante of the Constitution. Alternatively, the President of India or the Supreme Court may find out a mechanism to undo the harm inadvertently done to the Constitution. The Chief Justice of India would earn the goodwill of our people if he could restore socialism to its pre-eminent   position before his retirement.

Vellicode,                                                                                                 Yours faithfully,

V.SABARIMUTHU

17-4-2002.

V.SABARIMUTHU.

            On April 18, 2002, the Government of Andra Pradesh decided to split the State Electricity Board into four autonomous Corporations. This was consistent with the suggestions already given.

              The Union Minister for Civil Aviation, Mr. Syed Shahnawaz Hussain, on 18 April  2002 ruled out disinvestments in Air India and Indian Airlines saying that the immediate priority was to put them on firm footing. This showed that the Prime Minister, mainly because of these letters, did not prevail upon him to encourage the privatization of the AI and the IA.

       Mr. Ram Vilas Paswan too, on the same day, allayed fears that the National Aluminium Company, Nalco,- a PSU-  would be privatized on the lines of  the BALCO. This writer had sent a few letters to Mr. Ram Vilas Paswan.

          Presumably based on the letter dated 17-4-2002, the President of India invited the Prime Minister for talks on 19 April 2002. The meeting lasted for 45 minutes. Door Dharshan –the public sector TV channel- called DD- reported it. The newspapers did not report this matter at all.

       On 20 April 2002, there was a closed door meeting of Mr. Vajpayee with the Home Minister Mr. L.K.Advani, External Affairs Minister Mr. Jaswant Singh,  Law Minister, Mr. Arun Jaitely,  Disinvestments Minister, Mr. Arun Shurie and the party spokesman Mr. Vijay Kumar Malhotra.

       On the same day, Mr. L.K.Advani, referring to the incidents in Gujarat, asked the people not to take revenge.

          On 22 April 2002 the Chairman of Hindustan Paper Corporation (HPC) said that the exercise for the disinvestments of Hindustan Newsprint Limited (HNL) would be over by first week of May 2002. He    was not aware of the changes taking place due to this work.

          A Parliamentary Standing Committee on Shipping tabled its report in the Parliament on 23 April 2002. It opposed the privatization of the Shipping Corporation of India (SCI) at a time when it was planned to invest Re. 650 crore in fleet expansions.

      Similarly,  another Parliamentary Committee, headed by Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav, opposed the privatization of Indian Petro Chemical Corporation Limitd (IPCL).

      Now the I.5 lakh ordinance staff decided to defer their 48-hour agitation following an assurance from the Minister for Defense that the ordinance factories would not be privatized. This assurance came not because of their threat to strike work, but because of the pressure from the President of India based on this work.

          In the meantime, Mr. Arun Shourie,  Minister for Disinvestments, picked up courage and said that the Government would privatize 30 companies during 2002-2003.

      At the same time, Mr. Ram Vilas Paswan ruled out any disinvestments in Coal India Limited (CIL). Accordingly, the latter said that the Coal Nationalization (amendment) Bill would be withdrawn. It indicated that the Union Cabinet was not one sided in the matter of privatization.

          The confederation of Indian Industries and Commerce now invited Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, Congress President, to inaugurate its annual session. Thus, it deviated from its normal practice of inviting the Prime Minister to inaugurate the session.

     Mr. A. B. Vajpayee had been requested to give the valedictory address. This was presumably done in consultation with him. This was a ploy to woo the Congress President by flattering so that she would agree to a constitutional amendment like removing the word “socialism” from the Preamble. In this way, the industrialists wanted to show that there was unanimity between the ruling party and the main opposition party in the matter of privatization.

       The NDA actually had been very considerate with regard to the Congress President. It could be gauged from the fact that it even did not change the Governors appointed by the Congress Party. 

      However, the ploy did not work as Mrs. Sonia Gandhi had been continuously receiving copies of these letters. Thus she - in her inaugural address - very politely asked the motive behind inviting the leader of the opposition to start their annual get-together.

           She, further asked whether there was a change in the direction of the political wind. Finally, she said that due to the fundamental difference of opinion on the very character of the society there would not be much agreement between the Government and the opposition.

          On the next day, i.e. on 27 April 2002 Mr. A.B. Vajpayee, in his valedictory speech, said that the attempt to destabilize the Government with the support of the destabilizing forces had neither helped the cause of business nor had they done any good to the economy of the country. He asked Mrs. Sonia Gandhi not to count the chicken before they were hatched.

      Finally, as a reply to the letters of this writer, he said that, “The Government would do business with the businessmen and the businessmen would continue to do business with the Government”. 

     The above statement showed that Mr. Vajpayee was a supporter of privatization and that but for these letters he would have privatized all PSUs to the detriment 1000 million people.

          The industrialists were disappointed because their meticulous plan to enlist the support of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi did not click.

     The Delhi correspondent of The New Indian Express on 29 April 2002 said that the ruling coalition would no longer expect any helping hand from her even for carrying through the essential reforms bills and agreed reforms measures.

    The exasperated correspondent pointed out that her new stand did not auger well for the economy.  
    The article was concluded by saying that the Congress would go along with the Left for the rest of the term. 
      The implied meaning was that the letters of this writer and the President of India were standing in the path of privatization. However, they attributed this to Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. They did not to attribute anything to this writer.

9. THE SALE OF HINDUSTAN ZINC LIMITED (HZL)

9.

DEMANDS OF THE COMMON MAN

          The state governments began to show great interest in the service charges. Thus, in the budget for 2002-2003, the Finance Minister of the Kerala state said that he anticipated substantial income from service charges. The Governor of the Tamil Nadu state, on 9 March 2002, said that the government would urge the Centre to amend the Constitution to allow the states to levy service tax.

          The Hindu on 11 March 2002 reported the decision of the Government to sell 61 per cent of the shares - out of 87.15 percent shareholding – in the public sector National Aluminium Company (Nalco). This included 10 percent in the domestic and 30 percent in the American Market. This did not materialize until May 2011 mainly due to this work.

          Mr. A.B. Vajpayee, Prime Minister of India, on 15 March 2002 said that the Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) were sold to mobilize money for development purposes and to reduce the fiscal deficit. Actually, he gave more to the Unit Trust of India (UTI) through budgetary provisions than what he got through selling the shares of the PSUs. It was an act of corruption.

          On 20 March 2002, the Sterlite – a sister company of Vedanta-  and the A.V. Birla group company- Indo Gulf- submitted financial bids for securing control of public sector Hindustan Zinc Ltd (HZL) by buying 26 percent of the shares from the government.

         Indo Gulf submitted the bid only to show that the Vedanta had a competitor. Birla group was aware of everything.

          On the same day, Mr. A.B. Vajpayee gave an assurance to a delegation led by the MDMK leader, Mr. Vaiko, that the Neyveli Lignite Corporation (NLC) would not be privatized. He said this as an act of charity. Anyone going through this work would agree that he gave the assurance not because of the demand of Mr. Vaiko but because of the seven letters before him.

          Mr. P.V. Narasimha Rao, former Prime Minister of India, said that the Government had no right to sell the PSUs under the fixed economy chosen by India. He compared the PSUs to Taj Mahal. The Hindu reported it just to show that it was publishing divergent views.

         However, on 21 March 2002, the Cabinet Committee on Disinvestments ( CCD) - presided over by Mr. A. B. Vajpayee - decided to sell the HZL to the Sterilite Ltd, which had been indicted by the Bumbai Stock Exchange (BSE).
          The sale took place with lightening speed.
         The turnover of the HZL in 2010-2011 was 8,40,000 tonne for Re.108.9 billion.

          In contrast, in order to affect the transfer of an officer, the file moves through at least four tables.

        The above decision was taken not by the Union Cabinet but by a team of conspirators that formed the CCD. 

Earlier the CCD under Mr. Advani had taken a decision to sell the VSNL. Here, Mr. A.B. Vajpayee wanted to show that he was as courageous as Mr. L.K. Advani.

Surely, the nation had not seen such a deep rooted conspiracy!

      Mr. Arun Shourie, Minister for Disinvestments, said that the decision had the seal of the Supreme Court. This indicated that the learned judges of the Supreme Court under Chief Justice S.P. Bharucha were co-conspirators of this conspiracy.

        Mr. Arun Shourie added that the money would be deposited in a bank.

      Naturally, the money deposited in the banks would again go into the hands of the industrialists to buy more assets.

       However, the Newspapers - The Hindu and The New Indian Express included- did not report anything about the decision.

       Obviously, the decision was taken by the CCD, and not by any competent authority. No law was followed. Even the guideline devised for privatization - that the PSUs should not be sold to indicted companies - was violated.

          In the above matter, Mr. A.B. Vajpayee acted like a thief. This went down as a crime against humanity.

Dr. Manmohan Singh government later gave Re. 3 lakh crore rotting in the Provident Fund to four players secretly. The immediate beneficiaries were Dr. Manmohan Singh, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and Mrs. Pratibha Devisingh Patil. This crime, perhaps, overshadowed the dreadful crime committed by Mr. A.B. Vajpayee.

   

          In contrast, Mr. A. Raja, a former Union Minister for Telecom, was sent to Tihar jail in 2011allegedly because he advanced the date of bidding for telecom licenses for Re.200 crore.

          Curiously, the Supreme Court and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) did not bother to go near Mr. A.B. Vajpayee till May 2011. This confirmed the involvement of the Supreme Court and the CBI in the murky deal.

          If the law had taken its course, Mr. A.B.Vajpayee and his colleagues would have gone to the Tihar jail long before Mr. A. Raja went there.

          Deeply disturbed by the decision of Mr. A.B. Vajpayee government, the letter No. 8 was sent to all dignitaries on 25 March 2002. The letter follows.

 From

          V. SABARIMUTHU,

          Thattankonam,

          Vellicode,

          Mulagumoodu P.O.PIN: 629167.

To

          His Excellency the President of India,

Presidential Palace

          New Delhi.

Your Excellency

          Kindly consider the following DEMANDS OF THE COMMON MAN.

1.       The Forty-second amendment to the Constitution of India is the greatest achievement of our Parliamentary democracy. So long as it is retained in the Preamble of the Constitution, the judiciary, executive and legislature will have no power to take any decision opposed to socialism or secularism. The benefits of this amendment must flow to the common man. Now it remains blocked.  The President of India must have promptly taken effective steps to restore the status quo ante of the Constitution. The President of India remaining silent without taking any concrete action, even after several letters, is nothing but obstruction of impartiality.

2.       The repercussion of the above amendment is that the Government is forbidden from selling any share of any PSU under any pretext to any private parties. Mr. A. B. Vajpayee, Prime Minister, pricked the bubble when he declared in Parliament that the decision to sell the PSUs was taken to reduce the fiscal deficit. He forgot the fact that the Union Government refused to sell a PSU to a state Government. Further, even if the crucial words-socialism and secularism- were expunged from the Constitution, imparting racist character to the PSUs would be repugnant to the Constitution. In this connection, it must be pointed out that Mr. A.B. Vajpayee had touched the feet of a destitute woman and as such, he must have saved socialism for her.

 3.      The masters of newspapers know that they have freedom of expression. However, they must realize that they do not have any freedom to suppress news and views. They are not publishing the views of the President of India or the leaders of the opposition parties with any consistency or continuity. They are not publishing even the observations of the judges of the Supreme Court in various cases. They suppress many murky deals and money launderings. They want to give the PSUs to the foreigners who could not be trusted to manage newspapers in India. They never tell that our strategic partner could sell his stakes in the PSUs to someone from Pakistan or China. They look at the Constitution through coloured glasses and remain as a threat to it. All those who still refuse to enlighten the consequences of socialism to the masses must be severely punished and sent to Tihar jail.  

 4.  If the common man takes a housing loan, his house is checked at least thrice to see that the money is not diverted. The Union Minister for Finance had to prevail upon the LIC, a PSU, to give a loan of Re 200 crore to the Government of Kerala state. Further, we are living in a country where an employee who stole Re. 850/- from a bank was dismissed from service. However, Tata is a very powerful man. He might have planted his men in all possible places. The MD of the BoI would be appointed as the Governor of the RBI or the Governor of a big state as a reward. In December 2001, a nationalized bank even hived off its Mutual Fund Scheme to him silently.  If such a trend were not checked, he would take Re. 85,000 crore from the banks, UTI and LIC to buy the AI, IA, SCI and Indian Railways. Hence, the CBI must verify the veracity of the allegation that Tata took Re.850 crore from the BoI to buy the VSNL. If possible the information such as the purpose of loan, date of application, the person who gave the legal opinion and the amount paid to him, the processing fee collected, security offered, reason for releasing the money in one go, date of utilization certificate, may kindly be furnished.

5. The suggestion to abolish bulk purchasing must be considered with all its seriousness. Recently, the BSNL concluded a deal to buy equipment worth Re. 2044 crore from some multinational corporations. When it was pointed out that bulk buying usually involved big commissions, the deal was renegotiated in the zonal level and the yield was 10%. One more negotiation in the state level would have fetched 10% more. Can a common man digest this? Whether the equipment really reached the real destinations or not is not clear to any one.

6.       The suggestion to split the big PSUs and  giving them to the state governments must also be taken with all its seriousness. In May 1999, the Department of Income Tax asked a former Chairman of a PSU, facing charges under FERA, to pay a tax of Re. 25 crore. Now the matter has gone into oblivion. The act of splitting the PSUs could check such big commissions. The PSUs could join together to undertake big schemes if necessary.

7. The suggestion to split the banks, LIC, UTI and giving them to state governments must be also considered to prevent flight of capital through Tatas and brokers. After the letter dated 1-6-2001 the UTI has split the jobs among several managers. Now the managers could sit in different state capitals.

8. In the Jain Hawala case, the Supreme Court had asked the investigating agencies to book all persons-irrespective of their positions- that are reasonably accused of committing crime. Using this observation, the CBI must check the proliferation of economic offenders.

9. According to the Supreme Court, the Constitution is supreme. Therefore, extirpation of socialism from the Preamble of the Constitution through the back door is nothing but anti-constitutional terrorism.  It is not possible for the common man to file a review petition in the Supreme Court.

10. When the salaries of the employees all over India are either denied or delayed, the Chief Justice of India is drawing salary from the consolidated fund without any problem. Obviously, the common man is not the competent authority to call for an explanation from the Chief Justice of India. However, the High Court, Cochin, has recently said that the people are the real employer of the Judges. If the Chief Justice of India respects this, he could kindly give answers for all unanswered questions in a simple straightforward language to enlighten the common man. Further, instead of belittling the judiciary by estimating 20% of the judges as corrupt, he must come out with concrete remedies for all the ills of the nation.

          Rectitude must be the hallmark of the Chief Justice of India. Respecting the Constitution, the Chief Justice S.H. Bharucha must rescue socialism immediately.

Vellicode,                                                                      Yours faithfully,

V.SABARIMUTHU

V.SABARIMUTHU

8. PLOT BEHIND THE SALE OF THE VSNL International Long Distance for RE.25 CRORE

 8

PLOT AFTER PLOT

       On 4 February 2002, Mr. A.B. Vajpayee, Prime Minister, declared that the Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) were the pillars of the economy. He added and that an impression was being created in the name of globalization that the PSUs had lost their importance, and that the Government had wanted to get rid of them.

      In contrast to his words, a sea change occurred in the policy of the Government on the same day.

          Thus, on 5 February 2002, Mr. A.B. Vajpayee convened a meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Disinvestments, (CCD), and it decided to sell 25% equity in the Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL) to Panatone, a company of Tata Group.

       The CCD also decided to sell Indo Burma Petroleum (IBP) along with its management control to Indian oil Corporation (IOC) Limited, another PSU. This was done to dilute the seriousness of the matter. Earlier, the Union Government had said that a PSU could not buy another PSU.

        Further, the CCD decided to sell four hotels of the Indian Tourism Development Corporation, (ITDC), to four private bidders.

       The Union Cabinet on the same day, approved a voluntary retirement scheme for permanent Government employees rendered surplus as announced in the budget.

          The industrialists were very happy with the decision.

       In fact, The Hindu described the sale as a “big step” forward through its editorial dated Feb 7, 2002. It hinted that the Reliance would bid for the HPCL and the BPCL.

       On the same day, The New Indian Express described the privatization as a silver lining as the Government could sell the VSNL without a murmur of protest from the opposition parties. Obviously, the industrialist chasing the VSNL was behind the media.

          There was a great plot because the money for buying the VSNL had been given through the public sector Bank of India.

        The above paper disclosed, “One secretary decided to raise the issue of why IOC should be allowed to bid at all (as it was a PSU)”. The editorial deplored that the Cabinet did not take any decision to cut the subsidies on kerosene and the LPC. The way in which the media diverted the attention of the people could be gauged.

          The spokesperson of the Congress (I), Mr. Jaipal Reddy, said that his party was opposed to selling profit taking industries.                 

        The Communist Party of India (CPI-M) said that the decision to sell the PSUs was a mockery of the pronouncement of Mr. A.B. Vajpayee - on the penultimate day of disinvestments - that the Government was not for liquidating the PSUs.

        The Communist Party of India, (CPI), said that the decision would undermine the economic sovereignty of the nation. In fine, the Left parties described the decision as “economic terrorism”.

          Clearly, the will of the Prime Minister was defeated by the sinister will of the industrialists. 

          In contrast, Mr. Subramonia Swamy congratulated Mr. Arun Shourie, Minister for Disinvestments, for maintaining the integrity of the tender process in the disinvestments of the IBP and the VSNL. He said that the Indian democracy would be strengthened by the failure of the Reliance Industries to subvert the tender bid and arm-twist the Government to favour them. His claim was that there was no cartel formation. When the licenses for telecom were given to the RIL he did not utter a word. The vicious arguments to privatize the PSUs could be discerned.

          In the meantime, the newspapers - on 8 February 2002 - reported that according to “Moody’s” - the international credit rating agency - India was heading towards a debt trap due to the inability of the Government to rein in its huge public sector deficit. It said that the rising debt service burden was consuming an overwhelming share of the resources. It said that the policy of depending on non-resident capital to finance account gap was not sustainable.

       The above arguments were to instill fear in the mind of the people about the future of India.

          In a crucial step, the Unit Trust of India, (UTI) - for the first time -decided to delegate certain powers to individual fund managers. The UTI decided to measure the performance of the managers using two yardsticks: performance vis-à-vis a bench mark like Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) 30 share sensitive index, and second the performance of the fund vis-à-vis its peers.

          There was a scheme behind the sale of the VSNL. But the Delhi correspondent of The New Indian Express in a major article said that the sale of the VSNL and the IBP limited passed off without much political noise. According to him, the Left parties kept quiet and the Congress had nothing to say. Finally, he challenged Mr. Arun Shourie to sell the nationalized banks. The article ended with the message that the sale of the banks would be not only a critical test but also a most welcome one. How the media directed attention precisely to wrong things could be gauged.

          However, this work alone was standing in the way of privatization.

          Unable to tolerate this work, Mr. A.B. Vajpayee - on 10 February 2002 - all on a sudden said that there was a conspiracy to disintegrate the country. He said this because he was deeply involved in hatching conspiracy after conspiracy.

      On 13 February 2002, Mr. Venkaiah Naidu charged the opposition parties with indulging in “backroom activities” to destabilize the Government. This, again, reflected the mind of the conspirators.

          On 13 February 2002, the Government identified Neyveli Lignite Corporation (NLC), Manganese Ore India Limited (MOIL), Rail India Technical and Economic Services and Project and Equipment Corporation, Maruthi Udyog Limited (MUL), Indian Petro Chemical Limited (IPCL), Jessop Engineering and Hindustan Zinc Limited for disinvestments before March 2002.

          On 14 February 2002, the CCD cleared the sale of 74 per cent Government equity in the loss making Public Sector Enterprise, Pradeep Phosphates Limited (PPL) to Zuari Agro Chemicals and Maroc Phosphore of Moroco. The pretext of Mr. Arun Shourie was that the PPL had eroded its net worth completely and it had a negative net worth of Re. 100 crore apart from an accumulated deft of Re.1140 crore.

          The Treasury of the Government of Kerala became empty on 13 February 2002. Following a SoS sent by Mr. A.K. Antony,  Chief Minister of Kerala, the Union Finance Minister, Mr. Yashwant Sinha, prevailed upon the LIC, a PSU, to release a loan of Re. 200/- crore to Kerala and the LIC obliged. However, some private companies obtained huge amount as loan without any difficulty.

          The Hindu - on 15 February 2002 - published an article by Justice Krishna Iyer, former judge of the Supreme Court, in its centre page. In that article he mentioned the Preamble that culminated in the creative expression “resolved to constitute India into a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, and Democratic Republic”. Apparently, The Hindu extracted that article from him, as it was aware of the existence of these letters. Neither did Justice Krishna Iyer mention this in his letter nor did he bother to know the reason for approaching him for various articles. He did not pursue his matter either.

          Mr. Vajpayee now said that any talk of socialism was out of sync with the changing times, which was governed by open market economy. “The Hindu” on 20 February 2002 reported this. The media simply suppressed all views against privatization.

          “The Hindu” on 24 February 2002- through Ms. Susma Ramachandran- demanded the Minister for Finance to create an environment to the industry to compete with global giants. For this, the paper wanted quick decision on labour and moving ahead quickly on public sector disinvestments.

          On 25 February 2002, the Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) signed license agreement with the Department of Telecom (DoT) for international long distance services. The RIL paid Re. 25 crore-entry fee besides Re.25 crore- as bank guarantee. One month earlier, it had obtained license for domestic long distance services. Thus there were two very big plots.

       Thus the RIL took the scare natural resource worth Re. several thousand crore practically free of cost. In fact, its real value cannot be estimated easily.

          The RIL dispersed its huge profit all over the world.

In order to buy five cent of land, one must pay 10 percent document charge. In order to buy this natural asset, the RIL did not pay even the registration fee. In fine, the government did not follow any law to give this.

The real players involved in the above plan were not known. Apparently,  Mr. A.B. Vajpayee, Mr. L.K. Advani, Home Minister, Mr. Yashwant Sinha, Finance Minister, and Mr. Arun Shourie were directly involved in this scheme although all Union Ministers were equally  responsible.

Mr. K.R. Narayanan, President of India, was highly critical of the working of the Government. But he could not realize the gravity of the manipulations. He should have demanded the Supreme Court to tell the reason why all Union Ministers should not be prosecuted.

If the Supreme Court had ordered an enquiry, the CBI would have unearthed the plots and all Union Ministers and the industrialists would have been charge-sheeted by the CBI. But the Supreme Court functioned as a co-conspirator. 

The money involved was so big that the CBI had no courage to go near anyone on its own.

Latter – in 2011- for an infinitesimally smaller crime Mr. A.Raja, a former Union minister, was sent to Tihar jail. Some shareholders of some small companies were also sent to the same jail because the Supreme Court saw a conspiracy. 

          On 28 February 2005, the Officer on Special Duty, Chief Minister’s Office, Punjab, referred the letters of this writer to the Principal Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Industries and Commerce to take necessary action. A copy of the letter was forwarded to this writer. Hon’ble Chief Minister of Kerala, Shri A.K.Antony  also acknowledged a letter.

          In the budget for 2002-2003, there was additional taxation for about Re. 30,000 crore. Most of the revenue was through service charges suggested by this writer.

      Further, full convertibility was granted to the NRIs, and there was a proposal to give loan to the rural people at 2% above the maximum deposit rate. The latter proposal was consistent with the proposal of this writer.

       With regard to privatization, Mr. Yashwant Sinha said that disinvestments in another six companies and the remaining hotels of the HCI and the ITDC would be completed in 2002-2003. Later, he hoped that the reform process was not held hostage to political process and compared it to crossing the forest in the darkness of night. According to him, if the process were stopped in the midway, the tiger would eat them! If that happened he said that, he would plead with the political parties, Parliament and Government as the reform process was still incomplete.

          The Hindu on the next day (1-3-2002) said through a Mr. Gail Omvedt that the government should not be running enterprises such as hotels, airlines, bakeries and the industries like the BALCO. The indirect message was that all the PSUs and the mineral wealth of India must be handed over to the master of The Hindu.

          On March 2, 2002, Mr. Vedprakash Goyal, Minister for Shipping, told newspersons that out of 12 parties who submitted their expression of interest (EoI) for the Shipping Corporation of India (SCI), one decided to pull out while another had been disqualified. Great Eastern Shipping Company, Malaysian International Shipping Corporation and Videocon International had expressed their interest in the SCI.

          On the same day, the letter No.7 that disclosed the manipulation of Tata was sent to the President of India and the Prime Minister of India, the learned judges of the Supreme Court and the Director of the CBI by post. The letter might have reached Delhi within three days.

Now a grave situation prevailed. The media syndicate projected the name of Mr. P.C. Alexander for the post of President of India because the then President was not amenable for manipulations. The industrialists distilled his name for the top post.

It appeared that a sinister design was behind the proposal. This writer considered it as a plot but felt very helpless.

However, this writer just pointed out the plight of the people to all the important political leaders. The letter did wonders as it changed the perception of the leaders.

The letter proved that the leaders have an unquenchable thirst for the good. Perhaps the mind of the Universe has its own way of solving the problems.

The apprehension of this writer proved correct when Mr. P.C. Alexander himself in an interview to the DD in September 2004 disclosed that he had been informed about the decision of the NDA long before the discussion started in the media. The way in which the industrialists build India using the media could be gauged.

  The important letter No.7 sent on 2 March 2002 follows.

From

          V. SABARIMUTHU,

          Thattankonam,Vellicode,

Mulagumoodu P.O. 629167.

To

          Mr. K.R. Narayanan   

          His Excellency the President of India,

          Presidential Palace, New Delhi.

Your Excellency,

                   Kindly consider the following DEMANDS OF OUR CONSTITUTION.

1.       The President of India must respect the Constitution of India. If the present President of India fails to protect the Constitution, the plight of the people when a representative of the industrialists occupies Presidential palace shall be envisaged.

           When the common man points out that the Policy of Privatization is opposed to Socialism, the President must consider it in the proper perspective, hear the views of the constitutional experts, filter them and take a correct stand. Absence of a reply in this regard conveys the impression that all those who facilitated privatization of the BALCO, VSNL, and other PSUs no longer enjoy the pleasure of the President of India.

2.       The Prime Minister must respect the Constitution. It is gratifying that the service charges and relatively higher credit at 2% above maximum deposit rates for rural people in the budget are consistent with the suggestions given earlier. However, the economic policy of the Government shall be none other than socialism.

3.       The Council of Ministers must respect our Constitution.

4.       The print media must respect our Constitution. Unfortunately, the sole objective of the print media is fattening their masters at the expense of the common man all over India. Obviously, the only field where they oppose the real FDI is in the print media. They do not like to point out that liberalization is different from privatization of the existing PSUs. They never say that the PSUs are functioning like private companies although the Government owns them. By not discussing the salient features of the Constitution at a crucial period, and by propounding different principles, they showed that they have an axe to grind, cheated 1000 million people and facilitated treachery and day light robbery. Further, the print media is conniving at several murky deals. In fact, the media syndicate is the anti constitutional terrorist in India. That the media syndicate is racist in character can be gauged from the editorial of The New Indian Express dated 10- 2-2002.

5.       The Governor, RBI, must respect our Constitution. It is his duty to prevent flight of capital from the States and from the country. Now he has asked the banks to see that the funds given to the PSUs are not diverted to the State Governments. In November 2001, Tata Finance-ran over the Bank of India (BoI) and took Rs. 850 crore as advance for an undisclosed purpose at a time when the State Governments were crying frantically for money. Tata had earlier diverted Re. 528 crore to Keten Parekh related activities. The CBI must have knowledge about the whereabouts of the money and now the RBI must ask the CBI to reveal the list of offenders involved in this deal. Had Tata been a common man not only the privatization of VSNL been stayed but also all his properties would have been attached. The only condition is that he should have taken the said Re. 850 crore. Previously Mr. Keten Parekh-a 24 year boy- could raise more than Re. 1000/- crore from banks and siphon off Re.3000 crore in March 2001 alone to other countries. The RBI reserved 5% of the credit to brokers and the guideline is even now followed although it was pointed out to the President of India that such reservations were unconstitutional. If the monies disbursed by the State Governments- instead of returning to the original place- land in foreign countries via Banks, UTI, Mutual Funds, LIC, Tatas and brokers, where will the State Governments go for money to meet the day today needs of their people? After causing such harms to economic activity, the RBI stands in the way of the State Governments from raising money from the banks.

6.       The Human Rights Commission must respect the Constitution. Since the SHRC found that an IPS officer was specifically responsible for an incident, either the SHRC or the NHRC must have saved the victim of that incident from prosecution. The letters sent to the President of India on constitutional matters shall not end in vain.

7.       The investigation agencies must respect the Constitution. They must resort to arrest a citizen or an alleged offender in good faith that too only after proper investigation. Not withstanding the set backs in lower courts, all cases involving big offenders must be taken up to the Supreme Court.

8.       The Comptroller and Auditor General and CVC must respect our Constitution. They must notice the suggestions given to the President of India and take necessary steps to prevent big commissions. The CVC should not expect the people without protection to provide the list of cases remaining in a half-baked condition.

9.       People must respect the Constitution. Some very powerful players including the masters of some newspapers are trying to become foreigners after becoming global giants by grabbing the PSUs. The act of permitting them to invest $100 million in other countries every year, as in the present budget, is a complementary action. They have already pocketed socialism. Now it is the duty of the people to restore the status quo ante of the Constitution.   

10.     The Chief Justice of India and all other judges must respect the Constitution. There was a time when post cards were accepted as writ petitions. 

          In this connection, it is disturbing to note that when the Prime Minister was in the USA the Cabinet Committee on Disinvestments took some crucial decisions. It was at this time it was reported that Tata was given an advance of Re 850/- crore from the BoI. It confirmed the worst fears of the common man that the PSUs would be purchased using public funds or ill-gotten funds and converted into private properties. Now the money parked abroad by brokers would be utilized to buy the Shipping Corporation of India. It must be also noted that the Prime Minister canceled the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs and the Cabinet meeting slated for January 29, 2002. The New Indian Express became so restless and bold that it on Feb 4, 2002 threatened to engineer a crisis to the nation. On the same day, the Prime Minister compared the PSUs to pillars. If the Prime Minister did not equivocate, it was the last resistance offered by him against disinvestments. However, on the next day, the offenders using muscle power like force vanquished him lock, stock and barrel. Earlier, when the sale of Air India was thwarted the print media had tried to pull down the Government.

          The Chief Justice of India should not follow the crowd. He must snatch the key to the Constitution from the offenders - keep it with him- and act without any fear or favour. 

Vellicode,

2-3-2002

Yours faithfully,

V.SABARIMUTHU