Friday, Sep 19, 2003
Friday, Sep 19, 2003 |
| Front Page | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Front Page
By J. Venkatesan
A file photo showing the name-board of the company engaged in the Taj Heritage Corridor project. — Photo: V.V. Krishnan
The ordering of registration of FIRs will enable the CBI to conduct a regular criminal investigation into the scam. A Bench, comprising Justice M.B. Shah and Justice B.N. Agrawal, had earlier directed a preliminary inquiry into the scam to ascertain the involvement of those connected with granting approval for the project without the Central Government's clearance and to find out how the first instalment of Rs. 17 crores was spent. The Taj Heritage corridor encompasses five important monuments — the Taj Mahal, Agra Fort, Rambagh, Itmad-ud-Daula and Chini ka Roja — and it was assessed that the massive project, including reclamation of the river-bed, would endanger the monuments. The Bench had earlier observed that the evidence collected so far pointed towards an offence committed under Section 13(1)(d)(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and, prima facie, was sufficient to initiate departmental proceedings against the officials involved in the scam.
Mayawati... in deep trouble
After considering the three reports of the CBI, the Bench was convinced that the registration of proper FIRs under the Criminal Procedure Code with charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Indian Penal Code was necessary for carrying out further investigation and to bring the case to its logical conclusion. As it was alleged that by undertaking the project, several environmental laws were also violated, the Bench empowered the CBI to include the charges against them under these statutes also. Besides Ms. Mayawati, the others against whom FIRs were ordered to be registered are: the former Union Environment Secretary, K.C. Mishra; the Managing Director of the National Project Construction Corporation (which took up the construction of the project), S.C. Bali; the former Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary, D.S. Bagga; the former State Principal Environment Secretary, R.K. Sharma; the former State Environment Secretary, V.K. Gupta, and the former Principal Secretary to Ms. Mayawati, P.L. Punia. In its report, the CBI had alleged that commencement of work under the project was approved by Ms. Mayawati. It also explained the role alleged to have been played by Mr. Siddiqi and the officials in the illegalities/irregularities and malpractices committed in the construction of the project.
The report stated that the Taj project, which envisaged linking the Taj Mahal with the four other monuments, was started on the verbal orders of Mr. Sharma and that the NPCC had unauthorisedly sub-contracted the work. The Bench said that it would be open for the Central and State Governments to pass the orders of suspension of the officials, if called for, in accordance with the rules. Following a request from the Additional Solicitor-General, Altaf Ahmed, that the assistance of the Income-Tax Department was necessary to unearth both the visible and invisible sources of income, the Judges directed the Income Tax Department to extend all assistance to the CBI in this regard. The Bench ordered a departmental inquiry against the senior officials and directed both the Union and the State Governments to appoint inquiry officers within a week to conduct the probe and submit a report within four months. The court directed the CBI to provide a "self-contained note" on its investigation so far to the U.P. Chief Secretary, the Cabinet Secretary of the Union Government and the Central Ministry administering the NPCC. When counsel for the Central Pollution Control Board, Vijay Panjwani, pointed out that construction had impeded the flow of river which was a penal offence, the court directed the CBI to take into consideration all environmental laws and the Prevention and Control of Pollution Act, 1974 and the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act while carrying out the investigation.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
