19.श्री शिबू सोरेन :पर्सनल एजेंडा वाले मंत्री
19.श्री शिबू सोरेन :पर्सनल एजेंडा वाले मंत्री
जब श्री सोरेन ने कोयला मंत्रालय का भार संभाला तो भारत सरकार के प्रचलित चलन के अनुसार उन्होंने राज्यमंत्री श्री दसारी नारायण राव को कोई विशेष काम नहीँ दिया, इस वजह से श्री राव बहुत नाखुश थे।
यह बात उन्होंने मुझे भी बताई। मैंने उन्हें सलाह दी कि वे या तो प्रधानमंत्री या फिर कांग्रेस
अध्यक्ष से इस बारे में बातचीत करे।
श्री सोरेन की राजनैतिक कर्मस्थली झारखंड रही है।
इसलिए उन्हें कोल इंडिया में फैले भ्रष्टाचार की अच्छी तरह जानकारी थी।
किन्तु श्री सोरेन इतने चतुर नहीँ थे कि कोयला मंत्री के सामर्थ्य का पूरा पूरा लाभ उठा सकते। उनके ऑफिसर ऑन स्पेशियल डयूटी (ओएसडी) श्री दीक्षित को
भी सरकारी कामकाज का कोई अनुभव नहीँ था। इसलिए उन्हें मंत्रालय के सामर्थ्य का उपयोग अपने व्यक्तिगत लाभ के कोयला सचिव और कोल इंडिया के अध्यक्ष के सहयोग की आवश्यकता थी। किन्तु
दुर्भाग्यवश दोनों ही उनका इस
विषय में सहयोग करने के अनिच्छुक
थे। शुरू-शुरू में सीआईएल के मुखिया श्री शशि कुमार को उन्होंने दबाने का प्रयास
किया। मगर वह बिलकुल दबे नहीँ। तब उन्होंने हर छोटे-मोटे कामों में उनकी मीन-मेख
निकालना शुरू किया। यहाँ तक कि एक प्रेस संबोधन करने के सिलसिले में अपनी गंभीर
आपत्ति प्रकट करते हुए उन्होंने पूछा, ‘‘आपने मेरी आज्ञा के बिना कोयले की कीमत के रिविजन पर
प्रेस को संबोधित कैसे किया?’’
क्या उत्तर देते श्री कुमार? प्रेस संबोधन को अपनी आज्ञा का उल्लंघन मानकर वह श्री
कुमार को निलंबित करना चाहते थे।मैंने उन्हें समझाया, ‘‘सीआईएल चेयरमैन को प्रेस का संबोधित करने के लिए आपकी
अनुमति की आवश्यकता नहीँ है। यह वजह उनके
निलंबन का कारण नहीँ बन सकती
है।"
मगर कुछ दिनों के बाद मंत्रालय के कार्य-वितरण आदेश में संशोधन किया गया। सारी फाइलें राज्यमंत्री श्रीराव से होकर कैबिनेट मंत्री को भेजी जाएँ। मुझे
नहीं पता कि सोरेनजी के अचानक हृदय परिवर्तन का क्या कारण था। मगर श्री राव ने कोयला मंत्रालय में पारदर्शिता लाने के मेरे हर
प्रयास को निष्फल करने में श्री सोरेन का भरपूर सहयोग दिया।
सीआईएल की अनुषंगी कंपनियों के डायरेक्टरों का
स्थानांतरण :-
सीआईएल की अनुषंगी कंपनियों में पैसा बनाने का विभव
हर जगह बराबर नहीँ है। लुकरेटिव पोस्टिंग पाने के लिए कई डायरेक्टर
मुँह माँगे पैसे देने के लिए तैयार रहते
हैं। कोयला मंत्रियों को और
क्या चाहिए? इससे अच्छा-खासा व्यवसाय क्या हो सकता है। इस गोरखधंधे पर अंकुश
लगाने के लिए एनडीए सरकार के
समय मंत्रियों द्वारा डायरेक्टरों के स्थानांतरण
करने पर रोक लगा दी थी। ऐसे सारे प्रस्तावों की स्वीकृति एसीसी द्वारा जरूरी कर दी गई।
श्री सोरेन ने डायरेक्टरों का इंटर कंपनी ट्रान्सफर
करने के लिए मुझे मौखिक आदेश दिये। गंभीरतापूर्वक मैंने उनसे कहा,"मंत्री महोदय! डायरेक्टरों का चयन 5 साल के लिए होता है। इस बीह उनका स्थानांतरण न तो कंपनी के हित में है और न ही उन
अधिकारियों के, जब तक कि कोई विशेष कारण
नहीँ हो।"
मेरी यह सलाह श्री सोरेन को पसंद नहीँ आई। जब मैंने कोयला मंत्री के मौखिक आदेश नहीँ माने तो श्री सोरेन
सीएमपीडीआईएल के एक डायरेक्टर का बीसीसीएल में स्थानांतरण करने के
लिए एक नोट भेजा। मैंने उन्हें समझाया कि यह उनके अधिकार क्षेत्र में नहीँ है इसलिए इस
प्रस्ताव अंतिम निर्णय के
लिए एसीसी को भेजना होगा।मेरा आप से अनुरोध है कि आप एक बार अनौपचारिक रूप से
प्रधानमंत्री से बातचीत कर लें। क्योंकि कैबिनेट मंत्री के प्रस्ताव को अगर एसीसी
रिजेक्ट कर देगा तो आपके लिए यह एक शर्मिंदगी की बात होगी।" -
मगर श्री सोरेन ने मेरी बात नहीँ मानी।प्रस्ताव एसीसी
को भेज दिया गया। जैसा मैंने कहा था- हुआ भी वैसा ही। श्री सोरेन के इस्तीफा देने
के बाद एसीसी ने उस प्रस्ताव को
रिजेक्ट कर दिया।
मेरा स्थानांतरण करने का
प्रयत्न :-
कोयला मंत्रियों को मैं पूरी तरह से असहयोगी लग रहा था। वे दोनों मिलकर मुझे मंत्रालय से बाहर का रास्ता दिखलाना चाहते थे।
सांसदों को मेरे और श्री कुमार के खिलाफ झूठी शिकायतें करने के लिए उकसा रहे थे।
धनबाद के सांसद चंद्रशेखर दूबे मेरे ऊपर स्विस बैंक में काला धन रखने का आरोप लगा
चुके थे। एक बार वह दो कंपनियों को कोल-ब्लॉक दिलवाने के लिये मेरे ऑफिस आये, तो मैंने उनसे पूछा, "दूबे जी! आपने मेरे खिलाफ प्रधानमंत्री को झूठी
शिकायत क्यों की?"
उन्होंने बिना किसी झिझक के कहा, "यह शिकायत मैंने तैयार नहीँ की थी। यह राज्यमंत्री के
ऑफिस में बनाई गई थी और मुझे उस पर हस्ताक्षर करने के लिए कहा गया था। बीसीसीएल
में आउटसोर्सिंग और हाउसिंग के मसले को लेकर मैं आपसे नाराज था, इसलिए उस शिकायत पर मैंने अपने हस्ताक्षर कर दिए।"
जहाँ दूसरे सांसद अपना काम निकलवाने के लिए अनुरोध
करते थे, वही दूबे किसी बॉस की तरह
आदेश देते थे। उन्होंने अपने दो नामित लोगों को कोल-ब्लॉक आवंटित करने के लिए मुझे कहा। मैंने उन्हें समझाया कि सरकार की प्रचलित गाइड-लाइनों के अनुरूप उन्हें कोल
ब्लॉक आवंटित नहीँ किए जा सकते।दूबे जी नाराज हो गए और क्रोध भरे स्वर में कहने
लगे, "क्या मुझे पता नहीँ है, इससे पहले आवंटन कैसे हुए थे? अगर तुमने मेरी बात नहीँ मानी तो तुम्हारा मंत्रालय रहना मुश्किल
हो जाएगा। मैंने उत्तर दिया, "आपकी जो इच्छा हो, कीजिए।" दोनों कोयला
मंत्री मुझसे नाखुश थे।कोल-ब्लॉक आवंटन की प्रक्रिया, ई-ऑक्शन से कोल मार्केटिंग, सीआईएल चेयरमैन की नियुक्ति और दीर्घ अवधि से लंबित
लिंकेज मामले ऐसे कई मुद्दे थे जिन पर मेरे और श्री सोरेन और श्री राव के विचार एकदम विपरीत थे। दूसरी बार कोयलामंत्री बनने के बाद श्री सोरेन ने
मुझे आमने-सामने “फेस टू फेस” बातचीत करने के लिये बुलाया।हमारी बातचीत का सारांश इस प्रकार है :-
सोरेन- सेक्रेटरी साहब, अगर हम दोनों के बीच एकदम तालमेल नहीँ हुआ तो कोयला मंत्रालय कैसे चलेगा? बाहर लोग यह सोचते है आप मंत्रालय चला रहे हैं, मैं नहीँ।
मैं- सर, भारत सरकार के बिजनेस रुल्स के अनुसार सेक्रेटरी और
मंत्री का काम बँटा हुआ है। मेरा दायित्व आपको सभी विषयों पर जनहित में सलाह देना है और मंत्री होने
के नाते आपका यह अधिकार है आप मेरी
सलाह मानें या न मानें। मैं आपके
लिखित आदेश को पूरी तरह से मानूँगा और
उसका पूरी तरह से क्रियान्वयन करूँगा, भले ही, वह आदेश मेरी सलाह के विपरीत क्यों न हो।
सोरेन- आपकी
शह के कारण सीआईएल चेयरमैन मेरे
आदेशों को नहीँ मानता है।
मैं:- मंत्री होने के नाते आपको सीआईएल के
दैनिक कार्यों में हस्तक्षेप नहीं करना चाहिए। सीआईएल बोर्ड कंपनी के रोज़मर्रा प्रबंधन के लिए उत्तरदायी है, न कि सरकार।सरकार को सीआईएल
प्रबंधन को नीतिगत मसलों पर निर्देश
देने का अधिकार है और सीआईएल बोर्ड और चेयरमैन सरकार के लिखित आदेशों को मानने के
लिए बाध्य है।
सोरेन:- सारे आदेश तो लिखित में नहीं दिए जा
सकते हैं।
मैं:- सरकारी अधिकारी या सीआईएल के अधिकारी यदि सोचते है कि वे मौखिक आदेश जनहित में नहीं हैं तो वे ऐसे मौखिक आदेशों को मानने के लिए बाध्य नहीं हैं।
सोरेन:- अगर ऐसा ही रवैया रहेगा तो आपके साथ काम करना बहुत मुश्किल हैं।
मैं- सर, मैंने तो सारे जीवन ऐसे ही काम किया है और मैं अब
अपना काम करने की पद्धति तो नहीँ बदल सकता। मगर मैं आपको इस बात का विश्वास दिलाता
हूँ कि आपको कभी भी गलत सलाह नहीँ दूँगा। आपके लिखित आदेशों का पूर्णतया पालन
करूँगा।
जाहीर है इस वार्तालाप से श्री सोरेन खुश नहीं थे। श्री सोरेन ने मेरे खिलाफ प्रधानमंत्री को एक लबा पत्र लिखा (परिशिष्ट-1) और मेरे मंत्रालय से स्थानांतरण
की मांग की। मेरे ऊपर उन्होंने बिजनेस रुल्स के अनुपालन में
विफल होने तथा अवज्ञा करने के लिये अनुशासनात्मक करवाई करने की भी गुजारिश की। उन्होंने अपनी चाणक्य बुद्धि का भी इस्तेमाल किया, प्रधानमंत्री को यह सूचित करते हुए कि मैं एनडीए
सरकार मैं चंद्रबाबू नायडु का आदमी हूँ और यूपीए सरकार में दरार डालने का काम कर
रहा हूँ। इतने से ही वह संतुष्ट नहीँ हुए और यह भी लिखा कि वह एक
आदिवासी नेता हैं, इसलिए मैं उनके प्रति भेदभाव
पूर्ण व्यवहार करता हूँ। उनके पत्र पर
सरकार ने मेरी टिप्पणी माँगी।
मैंने 22 मार्च 2005 को कैबिनेट सेक्रेटरी को एक पत्र लिखा (परिशिष्ट 19-2) जो इस प्रकार से था :-
"इस बात में कोई संशय नहीँ है कि प्रशासन ओर नीतिगत
मुद्दों पर मेरा कैबिनेट मंत्री और राज्यमंत्री से वैचारिक मतभेद रहा है। मेरी समझ
में सिविल सर्विस का सदस्य होने के नाते जिस तरीके से मुझे अपनी ड्यूटी निभानी
चाहिए, मैंने निभाई है। सरकार का
सचिव होने के नाते मुझे इस
बात का एहसास है कि मैं अपने मंत्रियों के समर्थन के बिना मेरे उत्तरदायित्वों का निर्वहन ढंग से नहीँ कर पाऊँगा।किन्तु मुझे नहीं पता कि इस समस्या का क्या
समाधान हैं।
2 मार्च 2005 को सिविल सर्विस ग्रुप की एक वेबसाइट whisperinthecorridor.com
पर एक टिप्पणी आई :-
क्या कोयला सचिव अपने पैरेंट कैडर को भेजे
जाएँगे? ब्यूरोक्रेसी सर्कल में इस
बात की चर्चा होने लगी है कि कोयला सचिव प्रकाश चंद्र पारख को अपने पैरेंट कैडर
आंध्रप्रदेश भेजा जा रहा है। सन 1969 बैच के आंध्रप्रदेश के आईएएस श्री पारख एक ईमानदार और
सत्यनिष्ठ अधिकारी माने जाते हैं।
1 मार्च 2005 को श्री
सोरेन ने झारखंड का
मुख्यमंत्री बनने के लिए अपने पद से इस्तीफा दिया। मैं अपने पैरेंट कैडर में नहीँ
भेजा गया। अगर श्री सोरेन कोयेला मंत्री बने रहते तो प्रधानमंत्री के पास मुझे
वहाँ से हटाने के सिवाय और कोई विकल्प नहीँ रहता। उनके लिए अपनी यू॰पी॰ए सरकार के
अस्तित्व को बचाए रखने के लिए सोरेन के झारखंड मुक्ति मोर्चा के पाँच सदस्य बहुत
मायने रखते थे।हमारे देश की साझा राजनीति में प्रधानमंत्री के पास बहुत ही सीमित
विकल्प होते हैं क्योंकि सरकार का अस्तित्व बहुत-सी छोटी-छोटी
पार्टियों पर निर्भर करता है।
कोयला मंत्री के पत्र और कैबिनेट सेक्रेटरी को लिखे गए
मेरे जवाब से हमारे लोकतन्त्र में सिविल सर्विस
की भूमिका पर मौलिक सवाल उठते
हैं। लोकतंत्र 'चेक' और ‘बैलेन्स’ के सिद्धान्त पर चलता है। इसलिए हमारे देश के संविधान निर्माताओं ने सोचा होगा
कि हमारे देश में संवैधानिक दायित्वों के भली प्रकार से निर्वहन हेतु एक स्थायी और
निष्पक्ष सिविल सर्विस का
प्रावधान रखा, ताकि राजनेता अपनी मनमानी न करें। लोकतंत्र में
राजनेताओं की मुख्यता पर तो सवाल ही नहीँ उठता है। किन्तु राजनेताओं
के द्वारा अपनी शक्तियों के मनमाने ढंग से प्रयोग न हो इसमें सिविल सर्विस की प्रमुख भूमिका होती है।
यह बात सभी को समझनी होगी और इसकी इज्जत भी करनी
होगी। मगर इसके लिए हमें करना क्या होगा? कुछ ऐसे संस्थागत ठोस कदम उठाने होंगे,जिनके माध्यम से राजनेताओं और प्रशासनिक अधिकारियों
की पृथक–पृथक भूमिका के बारे में
किसी को भी संदेह न हो और वे एक दूसरे को सम्मान की निगाहों से देखें।
मेरे ऊपर विश्वास करने के लिए मैं प्रधानमंत्री श्री
मनमोहन सिंह के प्रति अपनी कृतज्ञता ज्ञापित करता हूँ। श्री सोरेन, श्रीराव और कोयलांचल के सांसदों का उनके ऊपर इतना दबाव होने के बावजूद भी उन्होंने मुझे अपना पूर्ण समर्थन दिया।
इस बात का मुझे अवश्य दुःख है कि मैं
प्रतिस्पर्धात्मक बोली वाली प्रणाली कोल ब्लॉक आवंटन के लिए लागू न कर सका, मगर कोयला मंत्रियों के घोर विरोध के बावजूद भी मैं
कोयला बिक्री के लिए इंटरनेट पर आधारित ई-मार्केटिंग की मजबूत नीँव डालने में
अवश्य कामयाब हुआ। मुझे संतोष है
कि जब मैंने कोयला
मंत्रालय छोड़ा,तब सीआईएल की प्रत्येक
अनुषंगी कंपनी लाभ दर्ज कर रही थी। यहाँ तक कि बीसीसीएल जैसी लगातार हानि में रहने
वाली कंपनी ने भी पहली बार ऑपरेटिंग प्रॉफिट दर्ज किया। जब मैंने दिसम्बर 2005 में अपना कार्यभार छोड़ा, हमारे देश के सारे पॉवर प्लांटो में
कोयले का पर्याप्त स्टॉक था। एक भी पॉवर प्लांट ऐसा नहीँ बचा था, जिसमे स्टॉक की पोजीशन क्रिटिकल हो। मैंने ईश्वर के
प्रति धन्यवाद ज्ञापन किया, जिसने मुझे सारी विषम
परिस्थतियों में भी स्थितप्रज्ञ रहने की प्रेरणा दी और मेरे सारे कार्यों को सत्यनिष्ठा
के साथ पूरा करने के लिए अटूट दृढ़ संकल्प की शक्ति प्रदान की।
PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL
Hon’ble Prime Minister Sri Manmohan Singh
My Secretary (Coal) has a style of functioning that has no blend of procedure harmony and respect for political leadership. To his convinces, he flounders rules of business executive working with the intension of by-passing the Ministers. His recent conduct represents procedural failure and gross insubordination. He presumes that I am simple and gullible tribal and therefore, he can behave in such an irresponsible manner.
I recount some instances below to further substantiate the point, mentioned by me :
i) When I first took the charge of Coal and Mines Ministry in May 2004, I had sent a note to the Secretary of Coal to provide me with inputs to formulate new coal policy. While doing so, I had clearly mentioned that this should be submitted on time bound basis as I would want this to be announced by the Hon’ble Prime Minister as a part of his address to the nation from Red Fort on 15th August 2004, The Secretary (Coal) failed to even attempt this.
ii) At the same time, I sent another note to the Secretary asking him necessary information to deal with coal mafia. The Secretary did not give me required information nor he could explain to me delay in submitting the same. As a matter of fact, required information are not furnished to me till now which is a deliberate attempt to hide information from a Cabinet Minister. You will please agree with me that this is a serious lapse on the part of the Secretary being an absolute act of disobedience.
iii) In May 2004 immediately on taking over the Ministry, I discussed the issue of appointing regular CMD of Coal India Limited with Secretary. NDA Government had suspended N. K. Sharma, the CMD of CIL overnight. I had called this file to know the details. Before I could form any opinion, one day the file of dismissal of N. K. Sharma was put up to me and my signature were taken telling me all kind of urgency. Incidentally, immediately I received a letter from an Hon’ble M.P. complaining about conspired dismissal of N. K. Sharma. This letter was forwarded to the Secretary asking his explanation. You will be surprised to note that this letter was supressed and once again the Secretary indulged into act of insubordination. The file of N. K. Sharma is now resubmitted to me. The conspired approach of the Secretary speaks volumes of his strategy to install NDA and coal lobby sponsored Shashi Kumar as the C.M.D. of Coal India Limited. The sequence of events of last nine months does represent this.
iv) The Secretary, for the reasons best known to him, did not start the process of appointing a regular C.M.D. of CIL during my last stay as the Cabinet Minister. He initiated the process after my leaving the Ministry. The process, that started by the Secretary had only one objective and that was to appoint Shashi Kumar as the regular C.M.D. of CIL, over looking and relaxing many norms. I had been reading about this in regular newspapers. The rumor was that the Secretary wants to have Shashi Kumar as the regular C.M.D. of CIL, before my taking the oath of Minister for the second time. The pressure was also exerted on the Hon’ble Minister of State (Coal & Mines)
v) As soon as I took the oath in December 2004 as the Cabinet Minister of Coal, in respect of the proposal for appointment of regular CMD of the Coal India Ltd, I have come to notice certain glaring inadequacies in the way of the Secretary has handled the issue. While putting up the proposal for the approval of the Minister of Coal, he has disregarded the first recommendation of the CVC which required the Department to look into the issue of certain Directors of the Board of CIL being guilty of non-application of mind in the matter of unauthrised procurement of explosive worth about Rs. 300 crores. (The then CMD is under suspension and facing major disciplinary proceedings for the same).
vi) When the same was pointed out, the file was resubmitted without the necessary enquiry reports, records and views of the Department in the matter. All that was said was that the CVC has subsequently withdrawn their reference and hence the proposal may be approved. It was expected of the Secretary to have provided all the necessary records and documents when the substantial issue was raised regarding the role of a Director who was recommended for appointment as a regular CMD of CIL. I find this as a serious intentional lapse, which is unacceptable, as the same is not expected of the Secretary.
vii) When the Department’s proposal for appointment of the first candidate on the panel recommended by the PESB for appointment of CMD of CIL was rejected by me, I expected the Secretary to again put up the file to me for appointing the second candidate in the panel for the said post. However, without my knowledge, the Secretary (Coal), has decided, on his own, to send the file to ACC. This is absolute failure on the part of the Secretary to follow the procedure and business rules. This shows that the Secretary does not bother about the only Adivasi Minister in the Cabinet. He considers himself to be the superior to the Cabinet Minister and Minister of State (Coal). The attitude of the Secretary on this issue represents his obsession to appoint Shashi Kumar as the CMD of CIL for the reasons best known to him.
viii) Malafide intension and motive of the Secretary to pave way for the appointment of Shashi Kumar are obvious.
ix) There was lots of discussion about the motives of the Secretary in the coal trade. Immediately on my taking over as the Minister of Coal, the MPs requested me to investigate I received written complaints from them too.
x) The department has not demonstrated the desired sense of urgency in allocating long term linkage that are vital for various projects to take off. The standing linkage committee which does this jobs did not meet for more than one year and a half. When such meeting was finally held, it was without the necessary preparatory work resulting in no substantial outcome. At the time, when the coal availability is so critical this only represents lack of understanding of external environment which has complete dependence on distribution of coal.
xi) With regard to the mechanism of allocating captive coal blocks, while the entire range of industry, including their administrative Ministries, was opposed to captive bidding for various reasons, the Secretary (Coal) preferred to misled as if the industry was in favour of it.
xii) I have notice a certain tendency of inaction in the name of proposed policy changes. While new policy initiatives meant for positive gains are welcome, presenting it as an alibi to defer decision is difficult to appreciate. Critical sectors of the economy like power, iron, steel and cement are so dependent on coal that delay in its availability will have adverse consequences on economic growth. These sectors were made to feel the pinch for a considerable period of time on account of inaction by the department.
xiii) As a Minister of coal my priorities are new coal policy, employment in coal rich areas like Jharkhand and rehabilitation etc. But, the Secretary ( coal) has priority focused on only e-auction. The Hon’able Prime Minister as Minister of coal has approved only a pilot project for e-auction of coal in BCCL with specific reference to only 1.06 lakhs tones of coal. Only one trial e-auction has been conducted so far. The Secretary (Coal) has, however, permitted BCCL to put the entire non-core sector coal and the entire production of North Eastern Coal Field to be supplied through e-auction without my approval. He has done so despite my saying that this proposal needs to be properly addressed after adequate feed back from sufficient trial auction in order to achieve objective of coal distribution rather encouraging indirect monopoly in coal trade and lose control on its and user pricing.
xiv) The worse is that even as cabinet ministers are prevented from going public on policy matters before they are duly decided by the Government, Secretary (Coal) and, at his behest, some CMDs have announced that e-auction would soon be implemented all over Coal India Limited. This is nothing but pressuring the Government into accepting something which is not considered in details. In the end, if a contrary view is to be taken based on result of e-auction trials, the Minister and Government would be seen as anti reform. I am already concerned by the feed back in respect of e-auction.
xv) Effective functioning of PSUs is one of the main concern of the Hon’ble Prime Minister. The administrative departments are expected to discharge their role effectively in the monitoring of the performance of Board level functionaries within the existing parameter. It has come to my notice that the department of coal has taken a long period of 1-2 years in processing the proposal for regularization of appointment of board level functionaries. As a consequence, some of them would have continued without due regularization and may have even retired so. A file was put up to the Minister for regularizing the appointment of ten board level functionaries without the much desired Special Performance Appraisal Report. The Secretary (Coal) was asked to resubmit the said file, duly completing SPARs, the same was not done for about 3 months now.
xvi) Lack of consistency is another area of concern. With the due approval of Hon’ble Prime Minister as Minister of Coal, a series of Screening Committee meetings under the Chairmanship of Secretary (Coal) are being held for allocation of captive Coal blocks to various sectors of the industry. Before the first meeting, the Secretary (Coal) should have recommended and got approved the parameters of such allocation. It has been brought to my notice that half way though he is preferring to change the quantum and period of allocation which is being resented by the industry. This kind of approach may not reflect positivity on the style of functioning of the Government.
xvii) Allocation of captive coal blocks and long term and short term coal linkages are one of the core areas of the functioning of the Department of Coal. Surprisingly, Minister of coal was being kept out of the loop in this regard for the reasons best known to Secretary (coal). In respect of these two issues, representatives of industry and Hon’ble Members of Parliament keep representing substantial issues concerning the methodology, criteria, priorities etc. to the Minister of Coal. To be kept abreast of all these matters, I had desired to be associated with the same by putting up the minutes of the Committee meeting to me. The Secretary (Coal) has only reluctantly agreed to it demonstrating his lack of faith in the political leadership that is supposed to be pivotal in the Cabinet System of Governance. The Secretary (Coal), I conclude, does consider me as an untouchable and brainless in the context of providing of information to his Cabinet Minister.
xviii) The Department has proposed creation of a special fund for parking the stowing excise duty receipts for the purpose of carrying out statutory functions relating to safety in the mines, development of infrastructure etc. This is a major initiative and the Secretary has gone ahead with the same without my knowledge and approval. As I am fully aware of this problems related to coal areas, I had asked the Secretary (coal) to work on development of infrastructure and rehabilitation process under Coal Area Development Body and submit blue print so that the same could have been discussed with you. The idea was to get appropriate approval and you could have announced the same during year 2004 speech on the 15th August from Red Fort. Once again, Secretary (Coal) failed in carrying out instructions.
xix) Secretary (Coal) has recently been on a foreign visit with deviation in the tour programme approved by the Hon’ble Prime Minister in the capacity of Minister of Coal. The revised tour programme was to be submitted for approval of the competent authority. He has not done so, for a considerable period of time, setting a bad example. The concerned section has noted in the file that the Secretary’s office has not given the revised tour programme despite reminders.
xx) In the meantime, there were complaints of the Secretary (Coal) visiting Switzerland without due approval. Had he submitted the tour programme within the time, the controversy could have been avoided.
xxi) To cap it up, the Secretary (Coal) does not seem to be having due regard to the political leadership. It has been reported to me by reliable sources that he has been making uncharitable comments about me amounting to questioning the wisdom of the Hon’ble Prime Minister in my appointment as Minister of Coal.
In view of the above, I have to reluctantly take a view that it may not be appropriate to continue any further with the present Secretary (Coal) I, hence request the Hon’ble Prime Minister to kindly consider to substitute the present incumbent with a suitable alternative.
The Secretary (Coal) is an appointee of Chandra Babu Naidu, during NDA Government. I normally overlook political leaning of the officers working in the Ministry. But, I feel that even a Secretary can work to create a rift in UPA. I do not feel that the Secretaries working in the Centre do not care about Adivasi Ministers. Please understand my feelings and change the present Secretary (Coal) immediately. As also, please take administrative action against him for insubordination and failure to follow business rules intentionally.
With regards.
Yours sincerely
(Shibu Soren)
Dr. Manmohan Singh
Hon’ble Prime Minister of India,
7, Race Course Road,
New Delhi
Confidential
No. 2E/S/Secy (Coal) Dt. 22nd March, 2005
Dear Shri Chaturvedi,
Kindly refer to your D.O letter No. 10/7/2005-CS(A) dated 12/02/05. As desired my comments on the note are enclosed.
There is no gainsaying that I have had difference of opinion with both Minister of State and Cabinet Minister on several issues of policy and administration, I have found nothing of substance in the note for which I can be faulted. I have explained my position on each of the issues raised by the Minister.
In my understanding I have performed my duties in the manner that is expected of a member of Civil Service. As Secretary to the Government, I am deeply conscious of the fact that I cannot effectively discharge my responsibilities without full political support from my Ministers. However, I am at less to understand as to what could be done.
With regards.
Yours Sincerely
Encl : as above
Shri B.K Chaturvedi
Shri B.K Chaturvedi
Cabinet Secretary
Cabinet Secretriat
New Delhi
Comments on the note enclosed with the D.O letter No- 10/7/2005- CS(A) dated - 12th Feb, 2005 from Cabinet Secretary
Before giving my comments on each para of the note, I would like to make brief comments on the introductory para which states “Secretary (Coal) has a style of functioning that he has no respect for political leadership by passing the Minister as in following instances”.
Entire five page note, does not refer to a single instance where I have by-passed the Ministers or not implemented any written orders issued by them. I have always been polite and courteous in my written and oral communications with the Ministers and complied with all written orders even when I had serious difference of opinion.
However, if respect for political leadership implies complying with oral orders or recording notings that suits Minister’s interest, as against public interest, I am perhaps guilty of alleged short-comings.
Ministers perhaps do not appreciate that Business Rules of the government of India confer certain rights and enjoin certain responsibilities on the Secretary to the Government. As Secretary to the Government, I have both the right and responsibility to advise the Minister as to what I consider rational, fair in public interest. It is, of course, for the Minister to accept or reject such advice.
While note does not quote any instance of my by-passing Minister’s orders, I would like to quote a few instances where I promptly complied with written orders, which were against my advice and which I consider were wrong, partisan and against public interest, duly respecting right of the Minister to reject my advice.
I. CBI had requested for registering a regular case against Shri M. K. Thaper, CMD,SECL under Section 120(b) read with Section 420 of IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(I)(d) of Prevention of Corporation Act. After examining the material of record, file was submitted to PM as Minister (Coal) through MOS(C&M) with the recommendation to permit CBI to register the case. PM directed me to give a hearing to the officers concerned and submit a self-contained note taking all aspects of the matter into consideration. Accordingly, I visited Ranchi, examined all the relevant documents as well as officers concerned and found that there was more than an adequate evidence of misconduct on the part of Shri M. K. Thapar. I, therefore, recommended that CBI may be permitted to register a regular case. Ministers did not agree with the advice, However, orders of Ministers were complied with, though I consider it was a wrong order. It is a different matter that the said orders has since been revised by the Prime Minister as Minister-in-charge of the Coal Ministry.
II. Minister (Coal) had desired that Shri B. Bhattacharya, Director (Technical), CMPDIL, should be transferred to BCCL vice Shri H. R. Surana, Director (Technical), BCCL. It was suggested to the Minister that Mr. Surana was due to retire in couple of months and it is not desirable to shift Directors from one company to another, unless there are compelling reasons to do so. It may be noted that powers of inter-company transfer of Directors was extensively misused in this Ministry for reasons which are not difficult to understand and hence these powers were withdrawn from Ministry by ACC. In compliance with written orders of the Minister proposal were send to ACC. ACC, of course did not approve the proposal.Requests for several more transfers of Directors were orally made by the Minister, which I had politely declined to recommend.
III. Screening Committee consisting of representatives of various Ministries has been deliberating and deciding allocation of captive Coal mining blocks for the last several years. Agenda notes and minutes of these meetings were never submitted for approval of the Minister. Minister, however, desired that agenda notes and minutesof meeting should be submitted to him. Approval of agenda notes and minutes by Ministers does not serve any useful purpose. In fact, it is a strange request that the minutes of the meetings to which Ministers is a not a party should be approved by him. However, orders of the Minister were promptly complied with.
There are the few instances of orders which were irrational and not in public interest, but have been complied with, duly respecting the right of the Minister to reject advice tendered by the Secretary.
I would now proceed to deal with each of the paras of the note.
(I). A copy of the note dated 18.06.04 received from Shri Shibu Soren soon after be took change as Minister of Coal & Mines is placed at Annexure-I. The information sought by the Minister in his note was made available and file submitted to him on 14.07.04. It was also orally informed to the Minister that none of the policy initiatives that could be taken by Coal Ministry would of such relevance to common masses to deserve reference by the Prime Minister in his Independence Day address from ramparts of the Red Fort. The file was received back in the office on 26.07.04 without any comments after the Minister demitted his office.
However, a number of policy initiatives have been taken by the Ministry. Some of these have been implemented and some could not be implemented because of unwillingness on the part of the Minister to bring required transparency in respect of some of the policies. Some of the major policy initiatives taken by the Department are:
a) Allocation of captive coal blocks through open competitive bidding.
b) Marketing of Coal through internet based e-auction.
c) Out-sourcing of mining activities in Coal India for greater efficiency and economy.
d) Allocation of Coal blocks to public sector power utilities and State Government companies on par with CIL.
e) Allocation of Coal blocks on groups captive basis and leader associate basis.
f) Conferring status of Mini-Ratna to Coal companies in order to enable them to have greater delegation of power.
g) Streamlining process of project approvals.
(II). As regards dealing with coal mafia, Minister perhaps has far more knowledge about operation and strength of coal mafia as he comes from a State where strangle hold of the coal mafia is strongest. Coal mafia is not outside the Government. It exists within the Ministry of Coal, Coal companies, trade unions, State Administration and local political leadership. There are no easy and shortcut solutions to the problem of coal mafia in the current political and administrative milieu of the country. Dealing with coal mafia requires strong political commitments at Central and State Government level and ability to effectively enforce law and order which does not exist. I had no solution to offer to the Minister apart from bringing about structural changes in the operations of the coal industry for which Ministers have shown great reluctance.
(III). to (VIII). All these paras relate to appointment of regular CMD for CIL. Shri N. K. Sharma, the then CMD, CIL was placed under suspension by the Government on 4/6/03. Proposals for termination of services of Shri N. K. Sharma or in the alternative creation of super-numerary post in order to fill up the post CMD. CIL on regular basis were initiated by my predecessor well before I took charge the Ministry. By the time I took charge of the Ministry, the post of CMD, CIL had already remained vacant for over nine months. CIL is too important for country’s energy sector to remain without a regular head for a long time. I, therefore, followed up both the proposal in order see that post of CMD, CIL is filled up on regular basis at the earliest, I did seek and obtain approval of Minister for termination of services of Shri N. K. Sharma as E.O. required fresh approval from the new Minister. After proposal had been sent to the E.O. Minister endorsed to recall the proposal on receipt of a letter from shri Tek Lal Matho, MP. I advised the Minister that having once sent the proposal in respect of an officer who is facing several charges of misconduct, it will not be appropriate for him tom recall the proposal, and the Minister agreed with the advice.
Though proposals for termination of Shri Sharma and/or creation of a supernumerary post in the grade of Chairman CIL were being constantly followed up, orders for creation of a supernumerary post were received from PMO only after Shri Soren had resigned. While creating supernumerary post, PM also directed to fill up the post of CMD, CIL within one month. Accordingly process of selection was expedited and completed by the time Shri Soren was re-inducted in the Cabinet. I could not have had premonition about resignation and re-induction of ShriSoren to conspire and get Mr. Shashi Kumar selected in the intervening period. In any case selection for appointment of CMD was made by PESB and not me.
After post of CMD, CILwas notified by PESB, it was found that Mr. Shashi Kumar was the only candidate within CIL who fulfill the criteria for selection. It was, therefore, considered necessary to relax minimum experience required in order to see that PESB has a reasonable number of candidate from whom to select CMD, CIL. This was done in consultation with PESB. Relaxation in qualifying experience was not given in favour of Shri Shashi Kumar, but in favour of other officers.This can in no way be considered as a favour shown to Shri Shashi Kumar.
As regards alleged involvement of Shri Shashi Kumar in purchase of explosives for which Mr. N. K. Sharma was suspended, the relevant facts were in the knowledge of CVC and I am sure CVC would have taken note of these facts while giving vigilance clearance in respect of Shri Shashi Kumar. However, in view of the reservations expressed by the MOS, the role of Shri Shashi Kumar was fully investigation by CVO, CIL and CVC after examining the report of CVO, CIL has rightly advised that there was no misconduct on the part of Shri Shashi Kumar in purchase of explosives.
After clearance from CVC in respect of Shri Shashi Kumar was received, file for the appointment of Shri Shashi Kumar was submitted with the direction to the Joint Secretary that the file in which CVC’s clearances was received may also be submitted separately to the Minister for his perusal. The reason for processing both the files simultaneously was to ensure that there is no further delay in processing proposal for appointment of CMD, CIL and not to hold back any information from the Minister.
When the file for appointment of Shri Shashi Kumar was submitted for approval, it was clearly recorded in the note that the second candidate in the panel recommended by PESB was Shri V. K. Singh who was also clear from vigilance angle. If Minister had preference for Shri V. K. Singh, he could have indicated his preference for Shri V. K. Singh, while rejecting the proposal for appointment of Shri Shashi Kumar.
It is clearly laid down in the Transaction of Business Rules of the Government of India that the decision on acceptance or rejection of recommendation of PESB has to be taken by Appointment Committee of Cabinet (ACC) of which Minister is a member. In order to enable ACC to take a decision in the matter, all facts including detailed notings of the Minister have been communicated to ACC. In my understanding of the Business Rules, this is the only way in which cases where Minister differ from the recommendation of PESB have to processed.
I hold Mr. Shibu Soren is great esteem as a popular tribal leader.Difference opinion on specific issues does not mean that I do not bother for the only adivasi Minister.
I have seen working of Shri Shashi Kumar for the last one year. Shri Kumar is one of the few officers in Coal Industry with impeccable record of personal and professional integrity and courage of conviction. It will be great justice if his name for posting as CMD, CIL is rejected on extraneous considerations.
The decisions of Coal Ministry to reject request of CBI to register a case against ShriThapar and efforts to some how find some evidence of misconduct against Shri Kumar can not but send a message to the executives in CIL that personal and professional integrity does not matter and officers with resources or right connection can get away with anything. This will be a very unfortunate message to convey to an industry which is rampant with corruption and fully under control of mafia.
(IX). I am not aware of any discussion about my motives in the Coal trade as nothing specific has been mentioned about in the note. It is therefore not possible to make any comment on this observation.
As regards complaints form Members of Parliaments, lesser said the better. I had heard that signature of MPs can be obtained for a price on any piece of paper. I wish it was not true. However, my experiences of working in the Ministry for the last one year makes me believe that it is unfortunately true. I had earlier in my D.O. Letter No. Secy©/3.01.05 dated 6.12,04 had brought to the notice of the Cabinet Secretariat false and baseless allegation leveled against me by Shri Chandra Sekhar Dubey, MP from Dhanbad. I had requested Cabinet Secretary to bring this matter to the notice of the PM and Speaker of LokSabha for appropriate action. I am not aware if Government has taken any action on the letter.
Subsequent to Shri C. S. Dubey’s letter, another complaint against me was made by Shri GiridharYadav, I was very hurt by these motivated complaints from MPs and I had decided to call it a day and seek retirement from the Service. I had in fact drafted a letter which on second thought I did not send to you. I am attaching a copy of this draft as Annexure-2.
I am sorry to say that the Members of Indian Parliament who swear to uphold the Constitution of India can with impunity indulge in black mailing civil servants and senior executives of public sector companies to meet their personal ends. It is unfortunate that country has no institutional mechanism to stop such misconduct on the part of the law makers.
(X). As regards the allegation that Standing Linkage Committee (SLC) had not met for last more than one and half year, the responsibility does not lie on my door. I had been Secretary of the Department for less than one year. SLC meetings was scheduled in the month of the April, 2004 soon after my taking charge but had to be postponed on the directives of the then Minister (Coal) Ms. Mamta Banerjee, who wanted the meeting to be held only after elections to Parliament.
In any case with the current negatives coal balance, there is hardly any scope for giving new linkages. Any additional linkages without increasing production can be only a theoretical exercise.
(XI). As regards allocation of captives Coal blocks through competitive bidding, there are opinion in favour and against it. However, there can be no doubt that such a system will be far more transparent than any system that is based on subjective considerations. While both MOS and M(Coal) were strongly opposed to the idea, Prime Minister as Minister (Coal) had approved the proposal, I did not make any misrepresentation on the issue and deliberations of the meetings with stake holders were faithfully recorded.
(XII).This perhaps refers to non allocation of captive coal blocks pending approval of new policy of allocation based on competitive bidding. I did not expect that this proposal which will bring total transparency in allocation of Coal Blocks would face so many hurdles. Even after the Prime Minister while holding charge as Minister (Coal) had approved the proposal, Cabinet Note could not be processed as file remained pending with the Minister till he second time demitted the office. However, based on the decision given by Prime Minister to continue the present system of allocation, pending introduction of competitive binding, five Screening Committee meetings were held in the last four months and decisions has been taken in respect of more companies in last few months than what was done in the previous 10 years.
(XIII). No new coal policy can create additional employment in sick coal companies of Jharkhand which are already incurring losses because of huge unproductive manpower.
MOS and M (Coal) were always opposed to the e-auction proposal. Prime Minister during the short spell as Minister in-charge of Coal Ministry, approved a trial auction. Trial e-auction was conducted successfully and netted substantial additional revenue for BCCL. Once the first trial auction was successful, it was logical to extend it further and have some more trials in orders to frame new marketing policy. However, Minister kept the file pending and finally before resigning rejected the proposal without indicating any reason. Dy, Chairman, Planning Commission has also recommended marketing of coal through e-auction and the proposal has now been resubmitted for the approval of the Prime Minister in his capacity as M (Coal).
There is large scale of black marketing and generation of bank money through patronage of coal mafia in current system of marketing of coal. In trial e-auction at NEC premium received was as high as Rs. 1000/ per tonne amounting to Rs. 25 lakhs per rake. Instead of this revenue legitimately accruing to the Coal companies which have been incurring losses year after year, this is being cornered by the black marketeers and mafia. The Minister instead of supporting the efforts of CMD, CIL to curb malpractices has been standing in the way of bringing transparency in marketing operations.
(XIV). There is nothing wrong in CMD CIL going to the press and announcing that if successful, trial e-auction will be extended to other companies also. In fact a public debate is a part of process of policy formation. Reaction generated through such public communications help in redefining and fine tuning public policy. Transparency in coal marketing is prime need of the coal industry and will be one major steps towards curbing role of coal mafia.
(XV). Responsibilities for the delay of more than two years in confirmation of board level appointees can not be that of a Secretary who has been in office for less than one year. In fact all the pending case were submitted for confirmation after my taking over as Coal Secretary. File for regularization was submitted based on the recommendations of PESB. PESB makes its recommendation based on the SPAR and lapse on the part of officers in not linking SPAR is not such a serious matter for which Minister should find faults with the Secretary.
(XVI). Screening Committee in recent meetings have proposed Group Captive Mining, concepts of leader and associates, reduced period of mine life etc. These policy changes have been generally welcome by the applicants for captive blocks and will result in significant improvement in satisfaction of coal demand in the shortest possible time. No policy can be valid for indefinite time, and has to constantly evolve based on the felt needs of the society. These changes in policy came out of deliberation of Screening Committee and have been submitted for the approval of the Minister. Any change in policy may adversely affect interests of some individuals, who may oppose it. But a policy formulated in larger public interest can not be faulted on account of opposition of a few.
(XVII). Allocation of captive Coal blocks has been going on for last 10 years and Long Term Coal Linkages are being given ever since Nationalizationof Coal Industry. These decisions have always been taken by the Screening Committee and Standing Committee that are inter-ministerial forums for decision making. Agenda and minutes of these meetings were not being approved by the Ministers. This practice was not started by me, I cannot therefore be blamed keeping Minister out of loop.
There is no merit in approval of agenda notes and minutes of meetings of these Committees by the Minister (Coal). If these committees suggest any policy change certainly those need approval of the Minister. But every decision taken by the inter-ministerial Committee does not need approval of the Minister. Such concentration of powers which is anti-thesis of declared policy of the Government for greater delegation and decentralization of powers. Since I did not find any merit in prior approval of agenda notes and minutes of meeting of these Committees, I had recorded my views against this proposal. However, agenda items and minutes of these meetings are now being submitted for approval of the Minister.
I have always candidly recorded my views on all proposals and promptly compiled with written orders even where my advice has not been accepted by the Minister. A difference of opinion cannot be construed as reluctance to comply with orders or lack of faith in political leadership.
(XVIII). Stowing exercise duty is collected and credited to the general revenues of the Union. Under Law, this duty is levied for development of infrastructure and taking measures for conservation of coal and safety in coal mining areas. Since these funds are credited to general revenues, a proposal was made to the Finance Ministry to credit these amounts in a separate fund so that amount collected as stowing exercise duty are available exclusively for the purpose mandated by Law. This was only an administrative change suggested in the interest of proper utilization of fund. The file was submitted to the Minister for information after sending the proposal to the Finance Ministry. Minister has not found fault with the proposal. I am unable to see what is the issue about.
A suggestion was made by the Minister for creation Coal Area Development Authority by crediting 1% of the profits of Coal Companies in a special fund. Such a fund can be created only by enacting a Law. This proposal has serious implications not only for coal industry but also for other sectors of Economy as similar demand can be made for creation of funds for Petroleum sector, Power sector and so on.
Pending formation of such an Authority, it was suggested to the Minister that Public Sector Coal Companies can contribute Rs. 1/- per tonne of Coal produced to be used for creation of fund for peripheral development of coal bearing areas. A scheme was accordingly drafted in consultation with CIL. When the file was put up to the Minister he suggested Rs. 2/- per tonne should be collected for the fund. The proposal has therefore been again referred to CIL for its views.
(XIX) & (XX). My tour programme for visit to US and Spain was approved by the PM as Minister (Coal). However, before the tour was undertaken it was found that Spain leg may not be useful in view of absence of senior executives of M/s Mishlin who were otherwise occupied. The programme was, therefore, slightly modified to drop Spain and include visit to two factories where hydraulic coal mining equipment are manufacturing. These two factories are located in close proximity to Frankfurt which to has to be any way touched on way to US. In absence of PM who was Minister-in-charge of Coal and was on US tour, revised tour programme was got approved by the MOS. The revised tour did not result in any additional expenditure for the Government and in fact resulted in considerable savings. I am unable to understand as to why delay in ratification of revised tour programme which was approved by the MOS should be made into an issue.
(XXI). I had never made any uncharitable remarks about MOS or Coal Minister despite my serious differences with them on several policy issues.
As regards respect for political leadership. I have already dealt with it in my introductory remarks.
In his letter dated 8th August, Shri PC Parakh IAS , has pointed out the unfortunate conduct of Shri Dharmendra Pradhan member of Parliament, vis-i-vis Shri Parakh, in the Course of the meeting of the Consultative Committee of the Members of Parlimant attached to the Ministry of Coal on the 5th August 2005. Shri Parakh has given notice of voluntary retirement and mentioned that he is proceeding on earned leave w.e.f from 9th August 2005. He is supernatuting on the 31st December, 2005.
2. It was only reently that Shri CS Dubey, Member of Parliament, had made a number of alligations against Shri Parakh. The allegations, and also, a complained from the then Coal Minister was exmined in detail, after taking into account the comments of the officer himself. None of the allegations against the Parakh were found to be prooved and the Prime Minister had approved that the matter be closed.
3. I have talked to Shri Parakh to reassure him of our full support in his efforts to meet the challenges of the coal sector including determination to fight the coal mafia. I have also assured him that the Government has full faith in his stewardship as Secretary of the Coal Ministry, and that the matter will be brought to the notice of the Prime Minister. We have to keep in mind that such incidents do not happen and proceedings in these committees are civil. I understand that Shri Parakh is likely to resume duties from Tuesday, 16th August 2005.
4. It may be appropriate if informally this is brought to be notice of the speaker.
(B.K Chaturvedi)
सुधीर मुनगंटीवार
Before giving my comments on each para of the note, I would like to make brief comments on the introductory para which states “Secretary (Coal) has a style of functioning that he has no respect for political leadership by passing the Minister as in following instances”.
Entire five page note, does not refer to a single instance where I have by-passed the Ministers or not implemented any written orders issued by them. I have always been polite and courteous in my written and oral communications with the Ministers and complied with all written orders even when I had serious difference of opinion.
However, if respect for political leadership implies complying with oral orders or recording notings that suits Minister’s interest, as against public interest, I am perhaps guilty of alleged short-comings.
Ministers perhaps do not appreciate that Business Rules of the government of India confer certain rights and enjoin certain responsibilities on the Secretary to the Government. As Secretary to the Government, I have both the right and responsibility to advise the Minister as to what I consider rational, fair in public interest. It is, of course, for the Minister to accept or reject such advice.
While note does not quote any instance of my by-passing Minister’s orders, I would like to quote a few instances where I promptly complied with written orders, which were against my advice and which I consider were wrong, partisan and against public interest, duly respecting right of the Minister to reject my advice.
I. CBI had requested for registering a regular case against Shri M. K. Thaper, CMD,SECL under Section 120(b) read with Section 420 of IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(I)(d) of Prevention of Corporation Act. After examining the material of record, file was submitted to PM as Minister (Coal) through MOS(C&M) with the recommendation to permit CBI to register the case. PM directed me to give a hearing to the officers concerned and submit a self-contained note taking all aspects of the matter into consideration. Accordingly, I visited Ranchi, examined all the relevant documents as well as officers concerned and found that there was more than an adequate evidence of misconduct on the part of Shri M. K. Thapar. I, therefore, recommended that CBI may be permitted to register a regular case. Ministers did not agree with the advice, However, orders of Ministers were complied with, though I consider it was a wrong order. It is a different matter that the said orders has since been revised by the Prime Minister as Minister-in-charge of the Coal Ministry.
II. Minister (Coal) had desired that Shri B. Bhattacharya, Director (Technical), CMPDIL, should be transferred to BCCL vice Shri H. R. Surana, Director (Technical), BCCL. It was suggested to the Minister that Mr. Surana was due to retire in couple of months and it is not desirable to shift Directors from one company to another, unless there are compelling reasons to do so. It may be noted that powers of inter-company transfer of Directors was extensively misused in this Ministry for reasons which are not difficult to understand and hence these powers were withdrawn from Ministry by ACC. In compliance with written orders of the Minister proposal were send to ACC. ACC, of course did not approve the proposal.Requests for several more transfers of Directors were orally made by the Minister, which I had politely declined to recommend.
III. Screening Committee consisting of representatives of various Ministries has been deliberating and deciding allocation of captive Coal mining blocks for the last several years. Agenda notes and minutes of these meetings were never submitted for approval of the Minister. Minister, however, desired that agenda notes and minutesof meeting should be submitted to him. Approval of agenda notes and minutes by Ministers does not serve any useful purpose. In fact, it is a strange request that the minutes of the meetings to which Ministers is a not a party should be approved by him. However, orders of the Minister were promptly complied with.
There are the few instances of orders which were irrational and not in public interest, but have been complied with, duly respecting the right of the Minister to reject advice tendered by the Secretary.
I would now proceed to deal with each of the paras of the note.
(I). A copy of the note dated 18.06.04 received from Shri Shibu Soren soon after be took change as Minister of Coal & Mines is placed at Annexure-I. The information sought by the Minister in his note was made available and file submitted to him on 14.07.04. It was also orally informed to the Minister that none of the policy initiatives that could be taken by Coal Ministry would of such relevance to common masses to deserve reference by the Prime Minister in his Independence Day address from ramparts of the Red Fort. The file was received back in the office on 26.07.04 without any comments after the Minister demitted his office.
However, a number of policy initiatives have been taken by the Ministry. Some of these have been implemented and some could not be implemented because of unwillingness on the part of the Minister to bring required transparency in respect of some of the policies. Some of the major policy initiatives taken by the Department are:
a) Allocation of captive coal blocks through open competitive bidding.
b) Marketing of Coal through internet based e-auction.
c) Out-sourcing of mining activities in Coal India for greater efficiency and economy.
d) Allocation of Coal blocks to public sector power utilities and State Government companies on par with CIL.
e) Allocation of Coal blocks on groups captive basis and leader associate basis.
f) Conferring status of Mini-Ratna to Coal companies in order to enable them to have greater delegation of power.
g) Streamlining process of project approvals.
(II). As regards dealing with coal mafia, Minister perhaps has far more knowledge about operation and strength of coal mafia as he comes from a State where strangle hold of the coal mafia is strongest. Coal mafia is not outside the Government. It exists within the Ministry of Coal, Coal companies, trade unions, State Administration and local political leadership. There are no easy and shortcut solutions to the problem of coal mafia in the current political and administrative milieu of the country. Dealing with coal mafia requires strong political commitments at Central and State Government level and ability to effectively enforce law and order which does not exist. I had no solution to offer to the Minister apart from bringing about structural changes in the operations of the coal industry for which Ministers have shown great reluctance.
(III). to (VIII). All these paras relate to appointment of regular CMD for CIL. Shri N. K. Sharma, the then CMD, CIL was placed under suspension by the Government on 4/6/03. Proposals for termination of services of Shri N. K. Sharma or in the alternative creation of super-numerary post in order to fill up the post CMD. CIL on regular basis were initiated by my predecessor well before I took charge the Ministry. By the time I took charge of the Ministry, the post of CMD, CIL had already remained vacant for over nine months. CIL is too important for country’s energy sector to remain without a regular head for a long time. I, therefore, followed up both the proposal in order see that post of CMD, CIL is filled up on regular basis at the earliest, I did seek and obtain approval of Minister for termination of services of Shri N. K. Sharma as E.O. required fresh approval from the new Minister. After proposal had been sent to the E.O. Minister endorsed to recall the proposal on receipt of a letter from shri Tek Lal Matho, MP. I advised the Minister that having once sent the proposal in respect of an officer who is facing several charges of misconduct, it will not be appropriate for him tom recall the proposal, and the Minister agreed with the advice.
Though proposals for termination of Shri Sharma and/or creation of a supernumerary post in the grade of Chairman CIL were being constantly followed up, orders for creation of a supernumerary post were received from PMO only after Shri Soren had resigned. While creating supernumerary post, PM also directed to fill up the post of CMD, CIL within one month. Accordingly process of selection was expedited and completed by the time Shri Soren was re-inducted in the Cabinet. I could not have had premonition about resignation and re-induction of ShriSoren to conspire and get Mr. Shashi Kumar selected in the intervening period. In any case selection for appointment of CMD was made by PESB and not me.
After post of CMD, CILwas notified by PESB, it was found that Mr. Shashi Kumar was the only candidate within CIL who fulfill the criteria for selection. It was, therefore, considered necessary to relax minimum experience required in order to see that PESB has a reasonable number of candidate from whom to select CMD, CIL. This was done in consultation with PESB. Relaxation in qualifying experience was not given in favour of Shri Shashi Kumar, but in favour of other officers.This can in no way be considered as a favour shown to Shri Shashi Kumar.
As regards alleged involvement of Shri Shashi Kumar in purchase of explosives for which Mr. N. K. Sharma was suspended, the relevant facts were in the knowledge of CVC and I am sure CVC would have taken note of these facts while giving vigilance clearance in respect of Shri Shashi Kumar. However, in view of the reservations expressed by the MOS, the role of Shri Shashi Kumar was fully investigation by CVO, CIL and CVC after examining the report of CVO, CIL has rightly advised that there was no misconduct on the part of Shri Shashi Kumar in purchase of explosives.
After clearance from CVC in respect of Shri Shashi Kumar was received, file for the appointment of Shri Shashi Kumar was submitted with the direction to the Joint Secretary that the file in which CVC’s clearances was received may also be submitted separately to the Minister for his perusal. The reason for processing both the files simultaneously was to ensure that there is no further delay in processing proposal for appointment of CMD, CIL and not to hold back any information from the Minister.
When the file for appointment of Shri Shashi Kumar was submitted for approval, it was clearly recorded in the note that the second candidate in the panel recommended by PESB was Shri V. K. Singh who was also clear from vigilance angle. If Minister had preference for Shri V. K. Singh, he could have indicated his preference for Shri V. K. Singh, while rejecting the proposal for appointment of Shri Shashi Kumar.
It is clearly laid down in the Transaction of Business Rules of the Government of India that the decision on acceptance or rejection of recommendation of PESB has to be taken by Appointment Committee of Cabinet (ACC) of which Minister is a member. In order to enable ACC to take a decision in the matter, all facts including detailed notings of the Minister have been communicated to ACC. In my understanding of the Business Rules, this is the only way in which cases where Minister differ from the recommendation of PESB have to processed.
I hold Mr. Shibu Soren is great esteem as a popular tribal leader.Difference opinion on specific issues does not mean that I do not bother for the only adivasi Minister.
I have seen working of Shri Shashi Kumar for the last one year. Shri Kumar is one of the few officers in Coal Industry with impeccable record of personal and professional integrity and courage of conviction. It will be great justice if his name for posting as CMD, CIL is rejected on extraneous considerations.
The decisions of Coal Ministry to reject request of CBI to register a case against ShriThapar and efforts to some how find some evidence of misconduct against Shri Kumar can not but send a message to the executives in CIL that personal and professional integrity does not matter and officers with resources or right connection can get away with anything. This will be a very unfortunate message to convey to an industry which is rampant with corruption and fully under control of mafia.
(IX). I am not aware of any discussion about my motives in the Coal trade as nothing specific has been mentioned about in the note. It is therefore not possible to make any comment on this observation.
As regards complaints form Members of Parliaments, lesser said the better. I had heard that signature of MPs can be obtained for a price on any piece of paper. I wish it was not true. However, my experiences of working in the Ministry for the last one year makes me believe that it is unfortunately true. I had earlier in my D.O. Letter No. Secy©/3.01.05 dated 6.12,04 had brought to the notice of the Cabinet Secretariat false and baseless allegation leveled against me by Shri Chandra Sekhar Dubey, MP from Dhanbad. I had requested Cabinet Secretary to bring this matter to the notice of the PM and Speaker of LokSabha for appropriate action. I am not aware if Government has taken any action on the letter.
Subsequent to Shri C. S. Dubey’s letter, another complaint against me was made by Shri GiridharYadav, I was very hurt by these motivated complaints from MPs and I had decided to call it a day and seek retirement from the Service. I had in fact drafted a letter which on second thought I did not send to you. I am attaching a copy of this draft as Annexure-2.
I am sorry to say that the Members of Indian Parliament who swear to uphold the Constitution of India can with impunity indulge in black mailing civil servants and senior executives of public sector companies to meet their personal ends. It is unfortunate that country has no institutional mechanism to stop such misconduct on the part of the law makers.
(X). As regards the allegation that Standing Linkage Committee (SLC) had not met for last more than one and half year, the responsibility does not lie on my door. I had been Secretary of the Department for less than one year. SLC meetings was scheduled in the month of the April, 2004 soon after my taking charge but had to be postponed on the directives of the then Minister (Coal) Ms. Mamta Banerjee, who wanted the meeting to be held only after elections to Parliament.
In any case with the current negatives coal balance, there is hardly any scope for giving new linkages. Any additional linkages without increasing production can be only a theoretical exercise.
(XI). As regards allocation of captives Coal blocks through competitive bidding, there are opinion in favour and against it. However, there can be no doubt that such a system will be far more transparent than any system that is based on subjective considerations. While both MOS and M(Coal) were strongly opposed to the idea, Prime Minister as Minister (Coal) had approved the proposal, I did not make any misrepresentation on the issue and deliberations of the meetings with stake holders were faithfully recorded.
(XII).This perhaps refers to non allocation of captive coal blocks pending approval of new policy of allocation based on competitive bidding. I did not expect that this proposal which will bring total transparency in allocation of Coal Blocks would face so many hurdles. Even after the Prime Minister while holding charge as Minister (Coal) had approved the proposal, Cabinet Note could not be processed as file remained pending with the Minister till he second time demitted the office. However, based on the decision given by Prime Minister to continue the present system of allocation, pending introduction of competitive binding, five Screening Committee meetings were held in the last four months and decisions has been taken in respect of more companies in last few months than what was done in the previous 10 years.
(XIII). No new coal policy can create additional employment in sick coal companies of Jharkhand which are already incurring losses because of huge unproductive manpower.
MOS and M (Coal) were always opposed to the e-auction proposal. Prime Minister during the short spell as Minister in-charge of Coal Ministry, approved a trial auction. Trial e-auction was conducted successfully and netted substantial additional revenue for BCCL. Once the first trial auction was successful, it was logical to extend it further and have some more trials in orders to frame new marketing policy. However, Minister kept the file pending and finally before resigning rejected the proposal without indicating any reason. Dy, Chairman, Planning Commission has also recommended marketing of coal through e-auction and the proposal has now been resubmitted for the approval of the Prime Minister in his capacity as M (Coal).
There is large scale of black marketing and generation of bank money through patronage of coal mafia in current system of marketing of coal. In trial e-auction at NEC premium received was as high as Rs. 1000/ per tonne amounting to Rs. 25 lakhs per rake. Instead of this revenue legitimately accruing to the Coal companies which have been incurring losses year after year, this is being cornered by the black marketeers and mafia. The Minister instead of supporting the efforts of CMD, CIL to curb malpractices has been standing in the way of bringing transparency in marketing operations.
(XIV). There is nothing wrong in CMD CIL going to the press and announcing that if successful, trial e-auction will be extended to other companies also. In fact a public debate is a part of process of policy formation. Reaction generated through such public communications help in redefining and fine tuning public policy. Transparency in coal marketing is prime need of the coal industry and will be one major steps towards curbing role of coal mafia.
(XV). Responsibilities for the delay of more than two years in confirmation of board level appointees can not be that of a Secretary who has been in office for less than one year. In fact all the pending case were submitted for confirmation after my taking over as Coal Secretary. File for regularization was submitted based on the recommendations of PESB. PESB makes its recommendation based on the SPAR and lapse on the part of officers in not linking SPAR is not such a serious matter for which Minister should find faults with the Secretary.
(XVI). Screening Committee in recent meetings have proposed Group Captive Mining, concepts of leader and associates, reduced period of mine life etc. These policy changes have been generally welcome by the applicants for captive blocks and will result in significant improvement in satisfaction of coal demand in the shortest possible time. No policy can be valid for indefinite time, and has to constantly evolve based on the felt needs of the society. These changes in policy came out of deliberation of Screening Committee and have been submitted for the approval of the Minister. Any change in policy may adversely affect interests of some individuals, who may oppose it. But a policy formulated in larger public interest can not be faulted on account of opposition of a few.
(XVII). Allocation of captive Coal blocks has been going on for last 10 years and Long Term Coal Linkages are being given ever since Nationalizationof Coal Industry. These decisions have always been taken by the Screening Committee and Standing Committee that are inter-ministerial forums for decision making. Agenda and minutes of these meetings were not being approved by the Ministers. This practice was not started by me, I cannot therefore be blamed keeping Minister out of loop.
There is no merit in approval of agenda notes and minutes of meetings of these Committees by the Minister (Coal). If these committees suggest any policy change certainly those need approval of the Minister. But every decision taken by the inter-ministerial Committee does not need approval of the Minister. Such concentration of powers which is anti-thesis of declared policy of the Government for greater delegation and decentralization of powers. Since I did not find any merit in prior approval of agenda notes and minutes of meeting of these Committees, I had recorded my views against this proposal. However, agenda items and minutes of these meetings are now being submitted for approval of the Minister.
I have always candidly recorded my views on all proposals and promptly compiled with written orders even where my advice has not been accepted by the Minister. A difference of opinion cannot be construed as reluctance to comply with orders or lack of faith in political leadership.
(XVIII). Stowing exercise duty is collected and credited to the general revenues of the Union. Under Law, this duty is levied for development of infrastructure and taking measures for conservation of coal and safety in coal mining areas. Since these funds are credited to general revenues, a proposal was made to the Finance Ministry to credit these amounts in a separate fund so that amount collected as stowing exercise duty are available exclusively for the purpose mandated by Law. This was only an administrative change suggested in the interest of proper utilization of fund. The file was submitted to the Minister for information after sending the proposal to the Finance Ministry. Minister has not found fault with the proposal. I am unable to see what is the issue about.
A suggestion was made by the Minister for creation Coal Area Development Authority by crediting 1% of the profits of Coal Companies in a special fund. Such a fund can be created only by enacting a Law. This proposal has serious implications not only for coal industry but also for other sectors of Economy as similar demand can be made for creation of funds for Petroleum sector, Power sector and so on.
Pending formation of such an Authority, it was suggested to the Minister that Public Sector Coal Companies can contribute Rs. 1/- per tonne of Coal produced to be used for creation of fund for peripheral development of coal bearing areas. A scheme was accordingly drafted in consultation with CIL. When the file was put up to the Minister he suggested Rs. 2/- per tonne should be collected for the fund. The proposal has therefore been again referred to CIL for its views.
(XIX) & (XX). My tour programme for visit to US and Spain was approved by the PM as Minister (Coal). However, before the tour was undertaken it was found that Spain leg may not be useful in view of absence of senior executives of M/s Mishlin who were otherwise occupied. The programme was, therefore, slightly modified to drop Spain and include visit to two factories where hydraulic coal mining equipment are manufacturing. These two factories are located in close proximity to Frankfurt which to has to be any way touched on way to US. In absence of PM who was Minister-in-charge of Coal and was on US tour, revised tour programme was got approved by the MOS. The revised tour did not result in any additional expenditure for the Government and in fact resulted in considerable savings. I am unable to understand as to why delay in ratification of revised tour programme which was approved by the MOS should be made into an issue.
(XXI). I had never made any uncharitable remarks about MOS or Coal Minister despite my serious differences with them on several policy issues.
As regards respect for political leadership. I have already dealt with it in my introductory remarks.
No.10/7/2005-CS(A)
Cabinet Secretariat
In his letter dated 8th August, Shri PC Parakh IAS , has pointed out the unfortunate conduct of Shri Dharmendra Pradhan member of Parliament, vis-i-vis Shri Parakh, in the Course of the meeting of the Consultative Committee of the Members of Parlimant attached to the Ministry of Coal on the 5th August 2005. Shri Parakh has given notice of voluntary retirement and mentioned that he is proceeding on earned leave w.e.f from 9th August 2005. He is supernatuting on the 31st December, 2005.
2. It was only reently that Shri CS Dubey, Member of Parliament, had made a number of alligations against Shri Parakh. The allegations, and also, a complained from the then Coal Minister was exmined in detail, after taking into account the comments of the officer himself. None of the allegations against the Parakh were found to be prooved and the Prime Minister had approved that the matter be closed.
3. I have talked to Shri Parakh to reassure him of our full support in his efforts to meet the challenges of the coal sector including determination to fight the coal mafia. I have also assured him that the Government has full faith in his stewardship as Secretary of the Coal Ministry, and that the matter will be brought to the notice of the Prime Minister. We have to keep in mind that such incidents do not happen and proceedings in these committees are civil. I understand that Shri Parakh is likely to resume duties from Tuesday, 16th August 2005.
4. It may be appropriate if informally this is brought to be notice of the speaker.
Cabinet Secretary
13.08.2005
Prime Minister
प्रति,
माननीय श्री पारिख साहब
सचिव
केंद्रीय कोयला मंत्रालय,
भारत सरकार,नई दिल्ली
सप्रेम जय विदर्भ !
महोदय ,
आपसे मेरी प्रत्यक्ष मुलाकात नहीं हुई है,लेकिन मैंने आपके बारे में, आपकी प्रमाणिकता के बारे में बहुत सुना है इसलिए यह पत्र आप के प्रति अपनी भावनाएं उजागर करने के हेतु लिख रहा हूं। आप व्यवस्था में बदलाव ला रहे हैं। मैंने आपकी प्रामाणिकता की प्रशंसा अनेक व्यक्तियों के माध्यम से सुनी है।आपने ई-आकषण शुरू किया। किसी भी प्रकार के राजनीतिक दबाव में न आते हुए आप जो कार्य कर रहे हैं वह निश्चित रूप से सराहनीय है। घाटे में चल रहे कोल इंडिया को मुनाफे वाली कंपनी बनाने के लिए जो कोशिश शुरू की है उसमें आप सफल हो इस हेतु मैं आपको शुभकामनाएं देता हूं।
आप जिस सत्य के मार्ग पर चल रहे हैं वह निश्चित रूप से काबिले तारीफ है। सत्य कभी कभी परेशान जरूर होता है लेकिन पराजित नहीं हो सकता। आपको मेरी हार्दिक शुभकामनाएं !
आपका स्नेह एवं सहयोग सदैव अपेक्षित।
शुभकामनाओं के साथ .....
आपका स्नेहाकाँक्षी
Comments
Post a Comment