SC slams PM’s order, says it was a cover-up

In a scathing indictment of the Vajpayee Government’s motives, the Supreme Court today held that the order cancelling all allotments in...

In a scathing indictment of the Vajpayee Government’s motives, the Supreme Court today held that the order cancelling all allotments in the wake of the petrol pump scam was just to ‘‘escape the scrutiny’’ of the politically motivated ones brought to light by The Indian Express.

Quashing the order to cancel all the 3,760 allotments made since January 2000, the court said that the Government should have instead ‘‘ordered an independent probe of (the 417) alleged tainted allotments.’’

Rejecting the Government’s claim to have acted in ‘‘public interest’’ and to uphold ‘‘probity in governance,’’ the court said that the cancellation order of August 9 had ‘‘the twin effect of scuttling the probe and depriving a large number of others of their livelihood.’’

Story continues below this ad

A bench comprising Justice Y K Sabharwal and Justice H K Sema, therefore, constituted a two-member judicial committee to probe whether the 417 politically connected allotments listed out by The Indian Express from August 2 to 24 were made ‘‘on merits or on some extraneous considerations.’’

NAIK GETS STRICTURES FROM HOUSE PANEL
In a report presented to the LS on Friday, the standing committee on petroleum and chemicals severely indicted the procedure followed in pump allotments: • Total failure of complaints cell to probe irregularities in allotments. • 500 complaints received should be probed independently and thoroughly. • Guidelines for dealer selection boards were presented in February, had the govt listened, ‘‘the scope of manipulations by the DSBs would have been minimal.’’

The committee which has been requested to submit its report within three months consists of a former Supreme Court judge, Justice S C Agrawal, and a retired judge of the Delhi High Court, Justice P K Bahri.

Significantly, while tracing the details of the investigation done by The Indian Express, the court specially mentioned that the August 5 issue of the newspaper published the name of one Aparna Misra ‘‘alleging that her husband is a relative of the Prime Minister and the address given is the same as that of the Prime Minister’s residence in Lucknow.’’

The court also pointed out that on the very day Misra’s name cropped up, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee publicly directed the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas to cancel all allotments made after January 2000. It was on the basis of this August 5 announcement that minister Ram Naik passed the August 9 order which has now been set aside.

Story continues below this ad

But, much to Vajpayee’s relief, the court said that it did not accept the allegation made senior advocate Rohington Nariman that ‘‘the entire exercise of cancellation was a result of the name of the Prime Minister’s relative being involved.’’

Referring to the massive political controversy triggered off by the expose, the court said: ‘‘It seems that the decision was a result of panic reaction of the government. No facts and figures were gone into. Without application of mind to any of the relevant consideration, a decision was taken to cancel all allotments.’’

The blanket cancellation was ‘‘unjustified and arbitrary,’’ the court said, because the controversy was raised only in respect of ‘‘five to 10 per cent of the allotments.’’

Lamenting that the government failed to examine the likely impact of the en masse cancellation, the bench said: ‘‘Many had resigned their jobs…. There were many scheduled castes/scheduled tribes, war widows, and those whose near relations had died as a result of terrorist activities. The effect on none was considered.’’

Story continues below this ad

Though the court was unsparing in its criticism of the government’s role in the scam, it made no reference anywhere in its 40-page judgment to a serious allegation made during the proceedings against retired judges who chaired the 59 dealer selection boards (DSBs) across the country.

A senior advocate and himself a former high court judge, N C Kochhar, alleged on behalf of non-political allottees that ‘‘the root of the scam’’ was the Government’s bid to lend credibility to the selections by using the services of retired judges without giving them enough independence.

In fact, some DSB chiefs had admitted to The Indian Express that they were under political pressure.

But the Supreme Court didn’t address this issue although it did mention in its judgment the skewed terms on which the DSB chiefs were appointed: ‘‘the chairman shall hold office during the pleasure of the Government and his services can be dispensed with even before the expiry of the tenure without giving any notice and without assigning any reason.’’