Congress says family silver being sold in IL&FS crisis
New Delhi, Sep 29 : The Congress on Saturday accused the Modi government of "financial scam management" and alleged that it was selling the family silver of the LIC and the SBI to bailout a private firm, IL&FS, which is saddled with long-term debt of Rs 91,000 crore.
Talking to the media, party media panellist Gourav Vallabh also said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi's pet project of GIFT city in Gandhinagar was "virtually a gift to IL&FS" and said his "role" needs to be seriously probed.
He said the Modi government has "systematically demolished" the foundations of the banking and financial services sector of the country.
"The latest episode in financial scam management series is the bailing out of Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Limited (IL&FS), - which is 60 per cent privately owned, out of which 36 per cent is owned by foreign entities and the rest 39.43 per cent is owned by public sector banks (PSBs) and the LIC," he said.
Vallabh alleged that the BJP-led government's modus operandi was to bail out corporate entities by using profit-making PSUs, thereby jeopardising the savings of crores of Indians.
"We have seen how ONGC was used to cover up the GSPC Scam, how LIC is bailing out a loss making IDBI Bank and now how LIC & SBI are being used to bail out a 60 per cent privately-held corporate entity i.e IL& FS. Is this the ‘Lehman Brothers Moment' for Modi government." he asked.
Vallabh said the total debt of IL&FS increased by a whopping Rs 42,420 crore in just four years of Modi government.
"This means that IL&FS' debt was increasing at the rate of Rs 900 crore per month under Modi government. If we add long-term and short-term debt, it is more than Rs 1,20,000 crore. It reflects that for a capital of one rupee, there was a Rs 7.71 debt in 2013-14 and under the present government, it has jumped by a massive 117 per cent to a debt of Rs 16.78 in 2017-18."
Vallabh said the Modi government's "economic mismanagement has left the IL&FS into a precarious financial situation", where it does not have the required cash to even sustain them and pay their employees and other dues.
"By forcing LIC & SBI to inject Rs 7500 crore, the Modi government is only providing a band-aid to a problem, which requires a surgery. Even the wound was inflicted by Modi government itself. It will lead the public-held LIC and SBI into a cycle of servicing unfathomable debt of a private company forever in future," he said.
He alleged that the IL&FS management was indulging in gold plating of contracts through their favoured associates. "The management is diverting IL&FS business to their personal entities siphoning off the funds, causing huge losses to banks, financial institutions and shareholders," he alleged.
Vallabh said a recent study on the borrowings of IL&FS has noted that there could be a systemic risk to PSBs and financial institutions.
"It is understood that SBI has already treated the exposure as NPA while there are others who are mulling legal recourse including some private finance entities," he said.
He said Modi's pet project of GIFT (Gujarat International Tec-City), which is pending since 11years, was envisaged with much hype and hoopla under the aegis of Gujarat Urban Development Corporation (GUDC).
"The entire development and the choice of partners is with IL&FS whose contribution is merely Rs. 2.5 Crore for 50 per cent stake," he said, adding that the land was to remain in the government's name, it has been fully transferred to the project company.
"This project has been a GIFT to IL&FS despite the fact that not even project management consultancy is provided by it."
He alleged that IL&FS "had outsourced the project management consulting work to another private operator." "The role of PM Modi needs to be seriously probed," he added.
The party asked why IL&FS has not been subjected to oversight either by Comptroller and Auditor General or the Central Vigilance Commission as the PSBs and LIC have 40 per cent stake.
"Why is the Modi government bent in pouring the hard earned money of India's people to bail out a semi foreign entity?" he asked.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC refuses to adjourn hearing on pleas against EC law, says this matter is more important
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to accede to the Centre's request to adjourn the hearing on pleas challenging the constitutional validity of a 2023 law that removed the CJI from a committee responsible for appointing the chief election commissioner and the deputies, saying the matter is "more important" than the Sabarimala case.
A nine-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant is currently hearing petitions regarding discrimination against women at religious sites, including the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, as well as the scope of religious freedom across various faiths.
A bench comprising justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma turned down the request by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, to adjourn the hearing on the ground that he was currently occupied before a nine-judge bench in the Sabarimala reference case.
Referring to the gravity of the current challenge to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, Justice Datta said, "This matter is more important than any other matter."
"Let your (solicitor general's) associates take notes today. Let the petitioners start. All matters are important. We read in the newspapers that there is an observation that the PIL in Sabarimala should not have been entertained by the court. So, with due respect to the judges, nine judges are occupied in a matter where there is an observation that it should not have been entertained in the first place," Justice Datta said.
ALSO READ: Girl mauled to death by stray dogs in Punjab's Hoshiarpur
The bench then directed the petitioners to conclude their arguments by Thursday, allowing the Centre to present its submissions on a subsequent date. The bench then proceeded with the hearing which is underway.
Earlier on March 20, CJI Surya Kant recused himself from hearing the petitions. "I will be accused of conflict of interest. There is a conflict of interest," the CJI had said. The law, enacted by Parliament in December 2023, came months after a landmark verdict by which the apex court directed that election commissioners be appointed by a committee comprising the prime minister, the leader of the Opposition, and the chief justice of India.
The bench had said that the system will remain in force till a law is enacted.
Under the 2023 Act, the selection committee consists of the prime minister, a Union minister nominated by the prime minister and the leader of Opposition (or leader of the largest opposition party in the Lok Sabha).
The PILs said the exclusion of the CJI from the panel undermines the independence of the appointment process.
The law has been challenged by multiple petitioners, including Congress leader Jaya Thakur and the Association for Democratic Reforms.
Earlier, the Centre defended in the Supreme Court the appointment of two new election commissioners under the 2023 law that excludes the chief justice of India from the selection committee, saying the independence of the Election Commission does not arise from the presence of a judicial member on the committee.
In an affidavit filed in the apex court, the Union law ministry rejected the petitioner's claim that the two election commissioners were hastily appointed on March 14, 2024, to "pre-empt" the orders of the top court the next day, when the matters challenging the 2023 law were listed for hearing on interim relief.
The apex court also refused to stay the appointment of new election commissioners under the 2023 law.
A five-judge constitution bench had in March 2023 ruled that the chief election commissioner and election commissioners shall be appointed on the advice of a committee comprising the prime minister, the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and the chief justice of India.
