Saturday, September 29, 2012

[rti4empowerment] Why no action against prematurely repatriated UP cadre IAS?


Why no action against prematurely repatriated UP cadre IAS?

Why no action against prematurely repatriated UP cadre IAS?

urvashi sharma

29 September, 2012

IAS officer Sadakant (UP Id 435, GOI Id 053200, Batch 1983, Cadre UP)
presently posted as Principal Secretary of Social Welfare with
additional charges of principal secretary of Women Welfare and child
development,Principal Secretary of Dr. Ambedkar Gram Sabha of Uttar
Pradesh Government, was an accused in cases of anti-national
activities, corruption and using graft money for building a Hanuman
temple in his home town. But the Mayawati government gave him a prized
position of Principal Secretary.

VIDE ORDER no. 20/G/2935-Ad.I dated 20 May 2011 of MHA GOI, the Union
Government of India prematurely repatriated Sri Sadakant, and put his
services at the disposal of the State Government of Uttar Pradesh for
Sadakant's alleged involvement in all of the above activites.

The IAS officer, repatriated on May 20, 2011, has been given many key
positions in the State Government by previous and present Governments
without any formal enquiry into the past charges of his alleged
involvement in these alleged crimes.

I as an RTI Activist had written to the authorities to institute an
enquiry against Sri Sada Kant. I had demanded that pending enquiry,
Sadakant be kept on a waiting list so that the state may not suffer
from Sada Kant's anti-national activities, his corruption, and also
from his habit of using graft money for religious causes thereby
hurting religious sentiments of millions in Uttar pradesh.

All charges leveled against Sada Kant by the Government of India are
very serious, and are sure to be detrimental to the state of Uttar
pradesh as well.

Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:


Friday, September 28, 2012

[rti4empowerment] 8 state information commissions stop work after SC order


8 state information commissions stop work after SC order
Commissions seek clarification on the apex court order


Though 8 SICs have stopped working, the CIC in Delhi is functioning.

The State Information Commissions (SIC) of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Haryana, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab and Rajasthan which halted work after the Supreme Court's order on appointment of commissioners, are still not functioning. There are a total of 28 state commissions.

These commissions decided to stop working either on their own or upon the advice of the Advocate General of the State or of the State's Law Department. The supreme court in the Namit Sharma judgement on September 12 had directed that all second appeals and complaints under the RTI act will be heard by a bench of not less than two members and this bench will be presided over by an Information Commissioner who has a law background and judicial training. SICs hearing RTI Act appeals await clarifications on their future course of action.

Many states reported unfilled information commissioner vacancies and some said it would take time to implement the changes ordered by the SC.

However, in Kerala the Advocate General has advised the SIC to continue working and the Central Information Commission continues to hear cases as before.

Also, work in all SICs in southern India continues as before. The Information Commissions of Chhattisgarh continues to work while awaiting clarifications from the state government about their future course of action.

In Jharkhand six vacancies in the Information Commission are to be filled up. Despite the availability of a member with judicial training who also meets the direction of the Apex Court that all Information Commissions must be headed by serving or retired judges, work has been halted in Jharkhand. While the concern in many other State Information Commissions seems to be about the non-availability of a member with judicial training, in Jharkhand the concern seems to be about non-availability of non-judicial experts

Goa is in a unique position of not having to make a decision about continuing or stopping work as there is no serving member on the Information Commission

Even more surprising is that most of the SICs that have halted work have publicly announced it. Haryana SIC has posted an announcement on its website about the stopping of hearings.

The apex court's judgement also directed that persons with law background and judicial training must be preferred for appointment as first appellate authorities to dispose of first appeals. According to reports in media the government of India is planning to approach the Supreme Court about difficulties with implementing the directions of the apex court.

The information has been compiled by Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative.

Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:


[rti4empowerment] Re: Penalty of Rs. One per day on conviction by Court !


Hi Amitabh your suggestion in Amending the SARAI ACt is worth praising. Hope the Govt. take this suggestion not only seriously but also on priority
LUCKNOW - 226018
Mob.: +91+9415787095

Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (2)
Recent Activity:


[rti4empowerment] Penalty of Rs. One per day on conviction by Court !



I have sent a letter to the Prime Minister and Law Minister of India making certain suggestions about a very old Act called the Sarai Act 1867. The Act was promulgated to provide for the regulation of public Sarais. "Sarai" has been defined here as any building used for the shelter and accommodation of travelers.  
Section 4 of this Act needs every Sarai and the name and residence of the keeper to be registered with the District Magistrate. This provision is very useful for internal security even today.

In this Act Sarai means a shelter for travelers, but the word "traveler" has not specifically defined in this Act. Hence I have suggested that the word "traveler" in the Sarai Act shall include among other things, those staying in private hostels and the paying guests, because today thousands of such people are found in every big city.
Section 14 of this fixes a penalty not exceeding twenty rupees, and a further penalty not exceeding one rupee a day for every successive day if the keeper of a sarai is convicted for violating any provisions of this Act or the regulations. This penalty would have some meaning in 1867 but today it seems to have lost all its meaning. Hence, I have suggested this penalty to be raised to a reasonable level keeping in view the present monetary value of money by getting the Act suitably amended in the Parliament.

There could be many other Acts needing change in monetary punishment as per the present requirements.
Amitabh Thakur
# 94155-34526

Copy of the letter-

The Hon'ble Prime Minister,
Government of India,
New Delhi

Subject- Regarding requisite changes in the Sarai Act 1867

Respected Sir,
The petitioner Amitabh Thakur, address- 5/426, Viram Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow-226010, phone number- 94155-34526 is a Government servant by profession (an officer of the Indian Police Service, UP Cadre) but he is presenting this letter in his individual capacity as a concerned citizen of this Nation. 
It is about a very old Act known as the Sarai Act 1867. The Act was promulgated to provide for the regulation of public Sarais and Puraos. "Sarai" has been defined here to mean any building used for the shelter and accommodation of travelers, and includes, in any case in which only part of a building is used as a sarai, the part so used of such building.
This Act is a very useful piece of legislature because it needs every Sarai and the name and residence of the keeper to be registered with the District Magistrate. The need for such an Act in present day situation can be underrated only at a great cost of the internal security and such an Act helps the District Administration to keep itself aware about the various travelers in a city.

There are a few provisions of this Act that seem to need an immediate attention on the part of the Government of India so as to suitably amend them as per the needs of the hour-
1.    While Sarai means a shelter for travelers, the word traveler has not specifically defined in this Act. In today's time, other than the daily travelers another set of people seem to have emerged in large numbers. They are the paying guests and private hostellers. Hundreds of private hostels and paying guest accommodation are sprouting and flourishing in every city. Hence, there seems to be a great need to adequately define the word "traveler" in the Sarai Act to include among other things, those staying in private hostels and the paying guests.
2.    Similarly section 14 in this Act is regarding penalty for infringing Act or regulations. It says that if the keeper of a sarai offend against any of the provisions of this Act or any of the regulations made in pursuance of this Act, he shall for every such offence be liable on conviction before any Magistrate to a penalty not exceeding twenty rupees, and to a further penalty not exceeding one rupee a day for every day during which the offence continues.
We all agree that a penalty of Rs. 20 after getting convicted for such a serious offence seems to be abysmally low. If I am allowed to use an appropriate phrase, it comes as being a "mockery of the legal process." Similarly, an extra penalty of Rs. One per day seems to be equally insufficient.

In the light of the above facts, I humbly make the following prayers-
1.       The Government may decide to define the word "traveler" in the Sarai Act 1867 to include private hostellers and the paying guests
2.       The penalty is raised to sufficient level keeping in mind the present monetary value of money vis-a-vis what is was when the Act was originally passed in the year 1867
and get the Act suitably amended in the Parliament.

Lt No- AT/Sarai/01                                                                                        Yours,
Dated- 28/09/2012                      
(Amitabh Thakur)
5/426, Viram Khand,
Gomti Nagar,
# 94155-34526
Copy to- The Hon'ble Minister for Law and Justice, Government of India for kind consideration and necessary action please

Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:


Thursday, September 27, 2012

[rti4empowerment] Govt may file review petition in SC on Sept 13 CIC judgement

Govt may file review petition in SC on Sept 13 CIC judgement

Press Trust of India / New Delhi September 26, 2012, 22:35

The government is likely to file a review petition before the Supreme
Court on its September 13 judgement that judges should also be
appointed as members of the Central Information Commission and state

Sources in the government said that the review is likely to be filed
following a legal opinion by the Attorney General that the present
system should continue and there was no need to change it at this

The review petition could be filed in the apex court in the next few
days, the sources added.

Attorney General G E Vahanvati is learnt to have said that more
clarity is required from the Supreme Court on the issue.

Holding that Central and state information commissions perform
quasi-judicial functions, the Supreme Court had on September 13 asked
the government to appoint people from judicial background also as its

A bench of justices A K Patnaik and Swatanter Kumar passed the order
on a PIL challenging section 12 and 15 of the Right to Information
Act, 2005 enumerating the qualifications needed for the appointment of
members to the commissions.

The bench, however, refused to quash the sections but asked the
government to modify it so that people from judicial background are
also preferred for the post.

Currently, none of the eight members of the Central Information
Commission (CIC), including the Chief Information Commissioner are
from judicial background.

The CIC comprises one Chief Information Commissioner and 10
Information Commissioners.

Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:


Sunday, September 23, 2012

[rti4empowerment] where to make complaint regarding in violation of the Constitution by the government?



--- On Mon, 24/9/12, gopalakrishnan velu <> wrote:

where to make complaint regarding in violation of the Constitution by
the government,individual, public authority (other than filing case in
the court). give name of office, address.

which office maintain records regardings constitution, ammendents?


Recent Activity:


[rti4empowerment] DNA Sep 24, 2012 Mumbai Page 14


One honest reason which is not cited here is courts pick and choose cases which they want to dispose of fast and which they want to delay and harass due to the influence of power (in politics)  or senior Advocates. They never take cases year wise, first in first out basis. ...Alok

Why the judicial process gets delayed

R N Bhaskar

Of all the privileges that the powerful can gain access to in India, the most potent is their ability to postpone cases.
At the investigative side, it allows for destruction or "creation" of evidence, while at the judicial level, it allows the powerful to get away with a crime, sapping the weak of their ability to fight corruption.

The ability of the powerful to manage the investigative and the judicial processes makes them more tyrannical and the poor that much more miserable. It hurts the poor and scares away businesses. Since the risks now for doing business in India has become greater, it drives up prices, to manage such related costs.
On January 12, 2012, a Supreme Court bench admitted that people's faith in the judiciary was decreasing at an alarming rate, posing a grave threat to constitutional and democratic governance of the country.
It wanted to seek answers from the government on amicus curiae's suggestion that access to justice must be made a constitutional right and consequently the executive must provide necessary infrastructure to ensure that every citizen enjoyed this right.
It also wanted the central government to detail the work being done by the National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms (announced by the government in June 2011 claiming to operationalise a number of plans to ensure expeditious and quality justice. The Centre said it was committed to spending Rs 5,510 crore in the next five years for the Mission). No clear timeline commitments are forthcoming as yet.
Meantime, the numbers reinforce a frightening picture.
According to 2010 Indian government data, about 300,000 of the total 430,000 prisoners in India were undertrials who are unconvicted defendants in criminal cases. In 2007, that number was only 250,727, which would suggest that the number has grown by 50,000 people in just over two years, said Jayanth Krishnan, professor at Indiana University Maurer School of Law, and Raj Kumar, dean at O P Jindal Global Law School, in their paper 'Delay in Process, Denial of Justice: The Jurisprudence and Empirics of Speedy Trials in Comparative Perspective,' published in the Georgetown Journal of International Law in 2011.
The increasing number of undertrials has led to overcrowding of prisons. By 2007, all the prisons in India accounted for 35% overcrowding as they had 376,396 undetrials against the sanctioned capacity of 277,304 (Prison Statistics India 2007, National Crimes Record Bureau). And this does not include the vast numbers in police lockups outside judicial custody. Sadly, except for a few high profile cases of the last few years, most undertrials are poor and powerless.
Kumar and Krishnan said, "The problem of delays by lawyers underscores the need for reforms in legal education as well as raising the quality of legal profession. The data released by the SC demonstrates that delays are indeed a reality and their causes are multifold, but a good part of the burden needs to be taken by the lawyers."
The other major reason why cases get delayed is shortage of judges. The sanctioned strength is woefully less. And even of these reduced numbers, many vacancies remain unfilled.
Vandana Kumar from department of law, Punjab University, said, "The institution of cases in courts far exceeds their disposal. The average disposal per judge comes to 2,370 cases in high courts, 1,346 in subordinate courts calculated on the basis of disposals and judge strength in December 2010. There is a requirement of about 1,539 high court judges and 18,479 subordinate judges to clear the backlog."
Since filling the vacancies is a prerogative of the court, the blame must be put on the judicial system, the non-availability of infrastructure. More courtrooms, more funds for the salary account, funds for technology 
upgradation and better working conditions have to be sanctioned by the legislature and implemented by the 
The Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) makes other recommendations:
l Create a statutorily-based committee devoted solely to monitoring detainees' rights.
l Have judges travel to the jails and adjudicate proceedings within the confines of the undertrials' cells. Such 'jail-adalats' have been instituted in various parts of the country, and there are some reports on their performance.
l Increase the number of judges in the criminal courts to reduce overburdened, delay-ridden dockets;
l Enhance the technological and infrastructural facilities of the courts themselves to make the courtroom process more efficient;
l Promote greater integrity by the police while encouraging the police to accelerate the investigation process, so that cases do not languish and collection of evidence is not neglected;
l Maintain the continuity of criminal cases from one judge to another when the presiding judge is transferred mid-case (as is common in this civil service-based judicial system) to a different court;
l Discontinue the frequent judicial practice of granting unnecessary adjournments;
Expand the bail opportunities for defendants charged with less serious crimes; 
Segregate undertrial prisoners from
those who have already been co
But till the vacancies are filled up, new posts created and filled, a system to weed out the corrupt and the inept, and the post of judges made more attractive, the dispensation of justice will be largely for the powerful and the influential.

Published Date:  Sep 24, 2012

Recent Activity:




1. I had filed form 7 for  removal of bogus name of one of name in my building. Besides various proofs ( his visiting card bore only Jaipur address, his cars were all in Jaipur and registered at Jaipur, all his bank accounts, all his mobiles, all his credit cards were of Jaipur address, that he had palatial bungalow in Jaipur,that his club memberships were in Jaipur , all his daughters studied in Jaipur,and many other records and   that  biggest proof which I gave was the same person Madhukar purohit had his name in Jaipur electoral rolls too. The election officers visited his room 4 times but never found him. Inspite of this his name was continued. No action was taken on officers who were siding him, no action was taken on Madhukar Purohit for giving false affidavt that he is a permanent resident of Mumbai and that his name does not appear any where in India except Mumbai. 

I made an application to Ration office for same purpose. they investigated . They knew he was not living here.Yet his ration card has been reactivated. His driving licence has been renewed in Mumbai. Shockingly though he/ his family  has several cars in Mumbai but none in Mumbai. 

The other day local fruit vendor said he wanted help as he wants his sons name to be included in Ration card who has just migrated. I asked him  to first cancel his sons name and bring receipt accordingly. After few days he came back saying he got his sons name included by paying Rs 5000/- . Now he can vote in Mumbai by including his name here and vote in UP too where he has to support his castiest politics. Then there he will get NREGA benefits and here on BPL card he will get free treatment, free space on footpath to sell fruits, free medical in BMC hosts, free water on illegal connections, and to top it all free housing on govt land. 

This is all while most of the police, govt officials and traffic police, ration officers, RTO officers and election officers are Marathi speaking . So SS and MNS have different slogan on lips but their beings have different colours when shown TIPS!!!!
So it seems most UP, BIHARIS have their names in MUMBAI as well as in their home statesd . Bangladeshis have in Bangladesh as well as in India. And if aspiring candidate has good relations with local election officer who does enumeration then they can add names of your choice and delete the others who r not likely to vote for you.
Thanks and Regards,
Alok Tholiya,
Marigold Hall,Tholiya Bhavan,
10Th Rd., Santacruz East,
Mumbai 400055

" Intense hate anywhere interferes with love everywhere ! "

• Pl. fwd./ circulate this mail if you think the issues raised here needs wider audience.

• Let us make our city beautiful, disciplined and Loveable.
Let us handover to our future generation a better place to live in.  : The matrimonial web site for Digambar Jains

• To subscribe to my very popular yahoogroup: 
Send blank mail to:

On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:33 AM, rajendra popat <> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: rajendra popat <>
Date: Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 10:31 AM
To: jagoparty <>
Cc: Public Concern for Governance Trust <>











PLEASE CONTACT : R.B.POPAT. 09769259566/09322272512, 

Recent Activity:


Saturday, September 22, 2012

[rti4empowerment] Re: violating Article 319, former member TNPSC was appointed has information commmissioner


This is a constitutional lapse and the appointment of  B Neelambikai is null and void. 

The point raised by gopala krishnan is a great question on the wisdom and ability of the State Government. 


Surendera M. Bhanot

- Coordinator, RTIFED, Punjab Chandigarh   
- President, RTI Help & Assistance Forum Chandigarh 
- Life Member, Chandigarh Consumers Association
- Youth for Human Rights International - YHRI - South Asia
- Jt. Secretary, Amateur Judo Association of Chandigarh
- Member, SPACE - Society for Promotion and Conservation of Environment, Chandigarh
No. 3758, Sector 22-D, Chandigarh-160022
Mob: 919-888-810-811
PHONE: 91-172-5000970
FAX: 91-172-5000970

Mail Me

Recent Activity:


[rti4empowerment] violating Article 319, former member TNPSC was appointed has information commmissioner


B Neelambikai was a member of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission between 2004 and 2010. was appointed has TN information commissioner violating article 319.

Article 319. Prohibition as to the holding of offices by members of Commission on ceasing to be such members:

On ceasing to hold office-
  1. the Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission shall be ineligible for further employment either under the Government of India or under the Government of a State.
  2. the Chairman of a State Public Service Commission shall be eligible for appointment as the Chairman or any other member of the Union Public Service Commission or as the Chairman of any other State Public Service Commission, but not for any other employment either under the Government of India or under the Government of a State.
  3. a member other than the Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission shall be eligible for appointment as the Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission or as the Chairman of a State Public Service Commission, but not for any other employment either under the Government of India or under the Government of a State.
  4. a member other than the Chairman of a State Public Service Commission shall be eligible for appointment as the Chairman or any other member of the Union Public Service Commission or as the Chairman of that or any other State Public Service Commission, but not for any other employment either under the Government of India or under the Government of a State.

Recent Activity:


Friday, September 21, 2012

[rti4empowerment] Coal Scam



I have received an email entitled "All you wanted to know about the coal scam" and it is being circulated for information.

Video at may also be seen for clarity on the subject.

This is a very complex subject with strong argument on both sides.

Dhirendra Krishna

What is the basic issue?

Between 1993 and 2011, the government of India gave away 206 coal blocks for free to government and private companies.

So, if these blocks were being given away free from 1993, why so much commotion now?

The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG), in a recent report, estimated that the losses due to the policy of the government giving out coal blocks for free amounted to Rs1.86 lakh crore.

Why is the Congress-led UPA government being blamed if the policy started in 1993?

Estimates made by stock brokerage CLSA suggest that only 41 out of the 206 blocks given away for free were allocated before the end of 2003. This means that 165 blocks were allocated between 2004 and 2011. The UPA government has been in power since May 2004. Hence, a major number of coal blocks were given away free during the UPA rule.

And how is Prime Minister Manmohan Singh involved in all this?

The PM also happened to be the coal minister between 2006 and 2009. During this period, 134 coal blocks were given away for free. Estimates made by Nomura Equity Research suggest that between 2006 and 2009, the coal blocks given away for free had geological reserves of around 40 billion tonne. India has around 286 billion tonne of geological reserves of coal. This means around 14% of total geological reserves of coal was given away free during the period Manmohan Singh was the coal minister.

What was the purported reason for giving the coal blocks for free?

This was done to increase the total coal production in the country. The government-owned Coal India Ltd, which accounts for 80% of the total coal production in the country, hasn't been able to produce enough to meet the growing energy needs of the country. Between April 1, 2004 and March 31, 2012, the production of coal by Coal India has increased by just 65 million tonne to 436 million tonne. This means a growth of a mere 2.3% per year on an average.

What is the reasoning behind CAG coming up with the 1.86 lakh crore number?

The CAG reasonably assumed that the coal mined from the coal blocks given away for free could have been sold at a certain price in the market. Since the government gave away the blocks for free, it lost that opportunity. This lost opportunity is what CAG has tried to quantify in terms of a number.

So, what were the assumptions that the CAG worked with?

While calculating the loss the CAG did not take into account the coal blocks given to the government companies. Only blocks given to private companies were taken into account. Further, only open-cast mines were included in calculating the loss. Underground mines were not taken into account.

How were the numbers worked out?

The total coal available in a block is referred to as geological reserve. Due to several reasons including those of safely, the entire geological reserve cannot be mined. The portion that can be mined is referred to as extractable reserve. The extractable reserves for the blocks (after ignoring the blocks owned by government companies and underground mines) came to 6,282.5 million tonne. This is equivalent to more than 14 times the annual production of Coal India Ltd. And this is the amount of coal the government would have been able to sell if it had not given the blocks away for free to private companies.

But that's just coal in tonnes, how did CAG arrive at a loss of Rs1.86 lakh crore?

The government gave away 6282.5 million tonne of coal for free. It could have sold it at a certain price. Also, mining this coal would have involved a certain cost. The CAG first calculated the average sale price for all grades of coal sold by Coal India in 2010-2011. This came to Rs1,028.42 per tonne. It then calculated the average cost of production for all grades of coal for the same period. This came at Rs583.01 per tonne. Other than this, there was a financing cost of Rs150 per tonne which was taken into account, as advised by the ministry of coal. Hence a benefit of Rs295.41 per tonne of coal was arrived at (Rs1,028.42 – Rs583.01 – Rs150). The losses were thus estimated to be at Rs1,85,591.33 crore (Rs295.41 x 6282.5 million tonne), or around Rs1.86 lakh crore, by the CAG.

But isn't Rs1.86 lakh crore a very big number?

Yes it is a very big number. But still a conservative estimate. The CAG does not take into account the losses on account of blocks given away free to government companies. As I had mentioned on an earlier occasion in this newspaper, the transaction of handing over a coal block was between two arms of the government. The ministry of coal and a government-owned public sector company (like NTPC). In the past, when such transactions have happened, revenue earned from such transactions has been recognised. A very good example is when the government forces the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) of India to buy shares of public sector companies to meet its disinvestment target. One arm of the government (LIC) is buying shares of another arm of the government (for example, ONGC). And the money received by the government is recognised as revenue in the annual financial statement. So when revenues for transactions between two arms of the government are recognised, so should losses. Hence, the entire idea of the CAG not taking losses on account of coal blocks given to public sector companies does not make sense. If they had recognised these losses as well, losses would have been greater than Rs`1.86 lakh crore.

So, this number could have been bigger?

Yes. The other point to remember here is that the CAG had assumed extractable reserves of a conservative 73% in case of mines where mine plans were not available. Typically, extractable reserves are around 80-95% of geological reserves. The CAG has also been very conservative in calculating the benefit per tonne of coal by taking the average price of coal sold by Coal India Ltd. This price is typically the lowest in the market. Coal from other sources is very expensive. Coal India also sells coal through an e-auction. The price of coal sold through this route is higher than the normal Coal India price. As the CAG has pointed out in its performance audit of ultra-mega power projects, the average e-auction price for Coal India coal was Rs1,782 per tonne in 2010-2011. Imported coal sells at an even higher price. The landed cost of imported coal was Rs2,874 per tonne (based on NTPC data for November 2009), reports CAG. If these prices had been taken into account or a weighted average price would have been created using these prices as well as the average Coal India price of Rs1,028.42 per tonne, the loss number would have been higher than Rs1.86 lakh crore.

If all this is true, so what was that Chidambaram said about zero losses?

The Union finance minister P Chidambaram wanted us to believe that almost all companies which have been given free coal blocks have not started to mine coal till date. Hence, there are no losses. This is like saying that I gave away my house for free, but since the person I gave it away to is not able to sell it, hence I did not face any losses.

What about the argument that coal is a natural resource and hence, should not be auctioned?

People who have come up with this argument also need to realise that coal, like air, is not an unlimited natural resource. So air need not be priced because it is unlimited, but coal needs to be priced because it is limited. And if that had not been the case, the government would be giving away all the coal that Coal India produces for free.

Recent Activity: