Let's read the story fully and truly introspect and, if
convinced, forward this to as many people as possible to create a
"wave" of public
opinion across India!!
Once there lived an old and pious man, renowned for his honesty. One
day his neighbor, a rich merchant comes to him with a request. The
merchant was leaving
on a voyage and wants the old man to safeguard his wealth, until his
return. The old man agrees and with God as witness promises to protect
and safeguard
the merchant's wealth.
The old man then entrusts the safe keep of the merchant's wealth to
his son, from whom he takes an oath of propriety and honesty. Slowly
the son starts
dipping into the merchants wealth, people notice this and warn the old
man of the son's misdeeds. The old man calls his son asks him to
explain, he also
reminds him of his oath on following the right path. The son rubbishes
the accusations as rumors and the idle gossip of jealous people, who
could bear
to see his prosperity.
The old man accepts the son's explanation and things go on as before.
The merchant returns and demands his wealth. The old man calls his
son, who hands over a quarter of the merchant's wealth saying that is
all there was.
The merchant realizing that he has been cheated approaches the King.
The King listens to the merchant's complaint and summons the old man.
The old man
comes to the court with his son and handing him over to the King says
"your majesty, the merchant is right. My son has confessed to the
crime. Please punish
him."
The king has the son flogged and imprisoned. He then praises the old
mans honesty and dismisses the case. But the merchant demands
punishment for the old
man saying, "I have still not received justice.I had entrusted my
wealth to the old man which he swore by God to safeguard. The old
man's integrity is
intact, but what of me, I have been robbed of my life's savings, and
made a pauper. It was the old man's decision to entrust my wealth the
son for safe
keeping. As far as I am concerned the old man is the culprit, and
should be punished.
The king is astounded by this demand. The old man, was neither a party
to the theft nor did he benefit from it. In fact, he had sent his son
to jail. Yet,
the merchant was asking for the old man's punishment.
The Vetaal asks Vikramaditya, "What should be the Kings decision."
Vikramaditya's replies, "Though the old man is innocent of the actual
theft, he is guilty of dereliction of duty. The son's crime was a
straight forward
one, the old man's was a graver crime. He did nothing to protect the
merchant's wealth. Far from being vigilant he failed to take action
even when he was
warned of his son's misdeeds. Because of his laxity the merchant is
condemned to a life of penury. He should be punished."
India 2010, Dr. Manmohan Singh, esteemed economist, former Governor of
RBI, Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission, former Finance Minister,
a man whose
personal ethics and integrity are unblemished, takes oath to protect
and safeguard the Nation and its assets. He appoints Raja, as hisCabinet Minister
for IT & Telecom.
Raja the Telecom Minister has with him keys to the 2G spectrum a
finite and precious National asset. Raja flouts all rules of propriety
and transparency
in Government, and in violation of his oath of office, sells the
spectrum at a throw away price of Rs.1651 crore.
1. DoT with Raja at its helm issues an astounding 120 UAS licenses in
a single day, January 10, 2008. A feat unsurpassed in the history of
Government
anywhere in the world. Suspiciously 85 of these licenses are issued to
companies which suppressed facts, disclosed incomplete
information and submitted fictitious documents.
2. In issuing these licenses neither the High Powered Telecom
Commission, which was expressly set up for this nor the Finance
Ministry or the Ministry
of Law and Justice are consulted. Vital decisions are taken without
being deliberated and discussed at inter ministerial forums.
3. In sharp deviation of business practice, the cut off date for
receiving applications gets advanced from Oct 1, 2007 to Sept 25,
2007, violating all
canons of fair play and ethics.
4. Real estate companies which till date of application had no
interest in Telecom are allotted Licenses and spectrum ahead of
genuine applicants. These
then go on to reap windfalls from foreign players by selling equity.
Unlike the story, this heist of a precious national asset is carried
out in full view of Dr. Manmohan Singh and his cabinet
colleagues.Newspapers across
the country cry out at this outrage in front page headlines.
The Indian Constitution grants the Prime Minister absolute power in
running the country. He is the head of the Government and the Union
Cabinet functions
at his pleasure. As per the Transaction of Business Rules the Prime
Minister has the unrestricted right to demand and get any file, any
record from any
Ministry. Dr. Man Mohan Singh could have at any time stopped this
heist of a National asset, yet he chose to remain silent. The
Minister's failure to exercise
his constitutional rights has caused irreparable loss to the Nation.
Dr. Singh did not profit personally from Raja's shenigans, but his
failure to act, to honor the oath of office, to protect and safeguard
the nation and
its wealth is unforgivable. Like the old man, he has sacked Raja from
his ministerial berth, but does his culpability end there.
The people of India had entrusted their faith and the future of the
Nation in Dr. Manmohan Singh, believing him to be a man of integrity
and honesty, and
not to Raja. Does dismissing Raja absolve Dr. Singh or like the old
man is he guilty of dereliction of duty and failure to safeguard the
Nation and its
citizens. Does he deserve punishment?
It is for the Indian citizen to decide, whether Dr. Singh is guilty.
--
convinced, forward this to as many people as possible to create a
"wave" of public
opinion across India!!
Once there lived an old and pious man, renowned for his honesty. One
day his neighbor, a rich merchant comes to him with a request. The
merchant was leaving
on a voyage and wants the old man to safeguard his wealth, until his
return. The old man agrees and with God as witness promises to protect
and safeguard
the merchant's wealth.
The old man then entrusts the safe keep of the merchant's wealth to
his son, from whom he takes an oath of propriety and honesty. Slowly
the son starts
dipping into the merchants wealth, people notice this and warn the old
man of the son's misdeeds. The old man calls his son asks him to
explain, he also
reminds him of his oath on following the right path. The son rubbishes
the accusations as rumors and the idle gossip of jealous people, who
could bear
to see his prosperity.
The old man accepts the son's explanation and things go on as before.
The merchant returns and demands his wealth. The old man calls his
son, who hands over a quarter of the merchant's wealth saying that is
all there was.
The merchant realizing that he has been cheated approaches the King.
The King listens to the merchant's complaint and summons the old man.
The old man
comes to the court with his son and handing him over to the King says
"your majesty, the merchant is right. My son has confessed to the
crime. Please punish
him."
The king has the son flogged and imprisoned. He then praises the old
mans honesty and dismisses the case. But the merchant demands
punishment for the old
man saying, "I have still not received justice.I had entrusted my
wealth to the old man which he swore by God to safeguard. The old
man's integrity is
intact, but what of me, I have been robbed of my life's savings, and
made a pauper. It was the old man's decision to entrust my wealth the
son for safe
keeping. As far as I am concerned the old man is the culprit, and
should be punished.
The king is astounded by this demand. The old man, was neither a party
to the theft nor did he benefit from it. In fact, he had sent his son
to jail. Yet,
the merchant was asking for the old man's punishment.
The Vetaal asks Vikramaditya, "What should be the Kings decision."
Vikramaditya's replies, "Though the old man is innocent of the actual
theft, he is guilty of dereliction of duty. The son's crime was a
straight forward
one, the old man's was a graver crime. He did nothing to protect the
merchant's wealth. Far from being vigilant he failed to take action
even when he was
warned of his son's misdeeds. Because of his laxity the merchant is
condemned to a life of penury. He should be punished."
India 2010, Dr. Manmohan Singh, esteemed economist, former Governor of
RBI, Deputy Chairman of Planning Commission, former Finance Minister,
a man whose
personal ethics and integrity are unblemished, takes oath to protect
and safeguard the Nation and its assets. He appoints Raja, as hisCabinet Minister
for IT & Telecom.
Raja the Telecom Minister has with him keys to the 2G spectrum a
finite and precious National asset. Raja flouts all rules of propriety
and transparency
in Government, and in violation of his oath of office, sells the
spectrum at a throw away price of Rs.1651 crore.
1. DoT with Raja at its helm issues an astounding 120 UAS licenses in
a single day, January 10, 2008. A feat unsurpassed in the history of
Government
anywhere in the world. Suspiciously 85 of these licenses are issued to
companies which suppressed facts, disclosed incomplete
information and submitted fictitious documents.
2. In issuing these licenses neither the High Powered Telecom
Commission, which was expressly set up for this nor the Finance
Ministry or the Ministry
of Law and Justice are consulted. Vital decisions are taken without
being deliberated and discussed at inter ministerial forums.
3. In sharp deviation of business practice, the cut off date for
receiving applications gets advanced from Oct 1, 2007 to Sept 25,
2007, violating all
canons of fair play and ethics.
4. Real estate companies which till date of application had no
interest in Telecom are allotted Licenses and spectrum ahead of
genuine applicants. These
then go on to reap windfalls from foreign players by selling equity.
Unlike the story, this heist of a precious national asset is carried
out in full view of Dr. Manmohan Singh and his cabinet
colleagues.Newspapers across
the country cry out at this outrage in front page headlines.
The Indian Constitution grants the Prime Minister absolute power in
running the country. He is the head of the Government and the Union
Cabinet functions
at his pleasure. As per the Transaction of Business Rules the Prime
Minister has the unrestricted right to demand and get any file, any
record from any
Ministry. Dr. Man Mohan Singh could have at any time stopped this
heist of a National asset, yet he chose to remain silent. The
Minister's failure to exercise
his constitutional rights has caused irreparable loss to the Nation.
Dr. Singh did not profit personally from Raja's shenigans, but his
failure to act, to honor the oath of office, to protect and safeguard
the nation and
its wealth is unforgivable. Like the old man, he has sacked Raja from
his ministerial berth, but does his culpability end there.
The people of India had entrusted their faith and the future of the
Nation in Dr. Manmohan Singh, believing him to be a man of integrity
and honesty, and
not to Raja. Does dismissing Raja absolve Dr. Singh or like the old
man is he guilty of dereliction of duty and failure to safeguard the
Nation and its
citizens. Does he deserve punishment?
It is for the Indian citizen to decide, whether Dr. Singh is guilty.
--
No comments:
Post a Comment