Govt says it’s a fault of the system, not the prime minister’s
The Supreme Court on Thursday quashed the appointment of P J Thomas as the Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC), striking a grievous blow to the Manmohan Singh government.
As the government scrambled to defend itself, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lost no time in mounting an attack, with veteran leader L K Advani holding both Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress chief Sonia Gandhi “responsible” for the episode.
While the prime minister said the government “respected” the court’s stand, indicating that it would not question the order, the party and senior ministers defended the prime minister. Law Minister Veerappa Moily said the appointment of Thomas, despite a corruption case against him, was a “fault of the system” and not a mistake made by the prime minister. Moily said the earlier CVC had cleared Thomas of wrongdoing at every step towards his appointment as the head of the country’s anti-corruption watchdog.
However, he could not explain how the executive record (ER) sheet, which was placed before the selection committee — comprising the prime minister, Home Minister P Chidambaram and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Sushma Swaraj — was silent on the case against Thomas.
Thomas is accused of being part of a conspiracy to import palmolein at prohibitive prices, causing Kerala a loss of over Rs 2 crore.
More From This Section
He was the state food secretary when the alleged scam happened.
Swaraj, who opposed the appointment, had alleged that the files circulated among the selection committee members did not mention the palmolein case. She said her objections were ignored.
The prime minister is likely to make a statement in Parliament on Monday after Leader of Opposition Arun Jaitley said the government should give details of Thomas’ appointment.
The Left also joined BJP. CPI(M) Politburo leader Sitaram Yechury said, “The prime minister needs to answer in Parliament how it went ahead despite all the facts known to everybody. Even the leader of opposition had objected.”
Even ministers considered close to the prime minister privately admitted that the court ruling was a major embarrassment for the government.
“Thomas should have stepped down taking the high moral ground when the Supreme Court first questioned his appointment. It would have saved the government embarrassment,” said a minister of state.
But publicly the government wore a brave face. “This is a failure of the system and we need to address that and move forward. It certainly is not a reflection on the collegium (the committee which selected Thomas) or the prime minister,” Law Minister M Veerappa Moily said.
Moily said executive orders were routinely challenged in courts. “The ruling is a guide for the future. The government will work on a process for future appointments. But, at the same time, we have to remember that certain procedures are well laid out,” he said.
Moily said vigilance clearance was obtained before Thomas was appointed as chief secretary of Kerala. “The court has remarked on what should have been done and the government will look into it,” he said. In defence, Moily quoted the court as saying that there was no need for a committee or a collegium to take a unanimous decision.
BJP spokesperson Rajiv Pratap Rudy cited the court judgment as “the biggest blow to Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi”. While the opposition thinks the judgment, ahead of the elections in four states, will swing the mood in its favour, the allies of the ruling United Progressive Alliance are confident the issue will not be a talking point in the elections.
But inevitably, the government was asking itself who was reponsible for the biggest administrative embarrassment the government has faced since it came to power for the second time. It put the blame on the state government. The Department of Personnel and Training(DoPT), in reply to a right to information application, said that ER sheet maintained by it was prepared on the basis of the information provided by the state government.
DoPT replied in the affirmative when asked in the RTI question whether Thomas was named as an accused in a supplementary FIR filed by the Kerala government in the palmolein case in 1992.
| ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST |
| 1992: Polayil Joseph Thomas, a 1973-batch IAS officer of the Kerala cadre, listed as the eighth accused in the palmolein case. The case pertains to alleged corruption in import of 1,500 tonnes palm oil from Malaysia through a Singapore-based company. Congress’ K Karunakaran, the chief minister then, was made the first accused. The second was the then food minister, T H Mustaffa. * The case was registered after a vigilance probe established the Comptroller and Auditor General’s preliminary finding that the state lost '2.09 crore as the deal was cleared without proper bidding. * Thomas was made an accused as he was the food secretary then and a director of the Kerala Civil Supplies Corporation. He was charged with criminal conspiracy and issuing an order in violation of norms. |
| 2005: The United Democratic Front government decided to withdraw the case on the ground that the state had benefited from the deal. It could not complete the legal formalities as Assembly polls were declared in early 2006. |
| September 2007 to September 2009: Thomas served as chief secretary from September 2007 to January 2009, after which he opted for deputation to the Centre and became parliamentary affairs secretary and later secretary of telecommunications and IT. |
| October, 2010: Thomas appointed telecom secretary and administers the 3G auction. Rules that CAG and the Central Vigilance Commission (CAG) cannot challenge the decisions taken by Raja. |
| September 3, 2010: Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Sushma Swaraj, a member of the panel to select the CVC, opposes his appointment. Home Minister P Chidambaram and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh present on the panel. |
| September 7, 2010: Thomas selected as the country’s 14th CVC. BJP boycotts swearing-in ceremony. |
| December 1, 2010: After the Supreme Court asks how can Thomas objectively supervise the inquiry into the 2G scam, the government tells the court that he will be taken off the CBI probe. |
| February 10: The Supreme Court reserves order against Thomas’ appointment. |
| March 3: A three-Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia terms Thomas’ appointment as illegal and orders his removal. |