Saturday, September 22, 2012

Interview Taken For Promotion Of Officers in Banks IS EYEWASH


Selection of CMDs and EDs in Public Sectors Banks  Are Nothing More Than Farce

by
Rajesh Goyal   


At the outset, I would like to admit that idea of writing an article under this heading is not my original idea.   A number of times such thoughts have crossed my mind, but I could not assimilate all these to write an article under such explosive heading.    As I was searching for something on banking, I came across a write up of 2005 in Rediff under the heading "Farce of Bank CMD Selection" (the original articles appears to have been published in Business Standard).   As I read the article, I felt that nothing has changed in last 7 years.   Thus, I thought of sharing my views with our readers with my own experience and current happenings.  Let us examine some recent experiences which led us to believe that selection to the posts of CMDs and EDs in PS banks is a farce. 




(A) Eligibility Criteria :  The First and foremost is the eligibility criteria for becoming CMDs and EDs of PS Banks.  The question to be asked is, whether we have any fixed criteria of eligibility  over a long period.  The answer is big NO.   Theeligibility criterion is changed so frequently and arbitrarily that no one is ever sure, whether next time he or she will be eligible for being called for interview.    The eligibility criteria is changed as per whims of the political and bureaucratic bosses, who do so to include or exclude certain candidates.   The news item of May 2011 in ET read



'Facing shortage of experienced hand, the government has relaxed the criteria for selection of Chairman and Managing Director (CMD) of public sector banks, a decision that would make several executive directors eligible for elevation as CMD.    Under the new criteria, a bank executive director (ED) with a minimum experience of 6 months would also be eligible to become CMDs.   Earlier, an ED had to serve a minimum of one year to become eligible for the bank's top post.  The government has eased the experience clause to 6 months from earlier requirement of at least 12 months".

Currently (August and September 2012), again the norms of selection criteria and postings of CMDs is again being tweaked to suit the current FM.  Files are moving from our Ministry to another department and back to approve the lateral movement of CMDs.



In respect of eligibility criteria, I would like to quote from the above article as these words still appears to be very relevant :



Q1 . Which of these statements is true?




(i) If you are an executive director of a public sector bank, you can qualify to head a PSB as its chairman-cum-managing director  provided  you have put in at least two years of service as an ED and have a residual service of two years.
(ii) If you are an ED of a PSB, you can qualify to head a PSB as its CMD, provided you have put in at least six months of service as an ED and have a residual service of two years.
(iii) If you are an ED of a PSB, you can qualify to head a PSB as its CMD, even if you have a residual service of less than two years.



Ans : All of these statements are true.



Q2. Which of these statements is true?
(i) If you want to become the CMD of a big PSB, you must become the chairman of a small bank first.
(ii) If you want to become the CMD of a big bank, you don't need to migrate from one small bank to a big bank. (iii) (iii) You can directly be made the chairman of a big bank.
(iv) You can never become the CMD of the same bank where you're an ED.
(v) You can indeed become the chairman of the same bank after serving as its ED.



Ans : Once again, all these statements are true.




In last 7 years some changes may be required to redraft the questions, but if we will see the eligbility criteria for last 7 years or so, there will be no doubt that eligibility criteria has been a BIG FARCE and manipulated every year to suit the candidates who have created leverage in the political circles.




(B) Farce at Interviews for CMDs and EDs :



We all are aware that how the selection of CMDs and EDs take place.  20 to 30 candidates are called on a single day / two days (if number is bigger).   The interview board calls each of them and asks them standard type questions for 10 to 15 minutes (sometimes it can be even less or slightly longer).  Something on similar lines as it happens for selection for the posts of Manager / Sr Managers at bank level.   Can a Board assess anybody for the post of CMD or ED in 10 to 15 minutes?  I know when my son was to be appointed at a Middle Level in an American MNC, he had to appear for 7 interviews with total time around 6 hours of interview times.  Here in India even for selection of CMD of biggest banks, 15 minutes is sufficient.  This shows the level of our commitment in selection process.  Everything is pre arranged and interviews are mere FARCE.




(C) What weightage is given to  Real Banking Experience:  I would not be off the mark, if I say NONE.   There are examples where officers who have NEVER worked in a branch have become CMDs of not one bank but TWO banks.   Even while promoting a hard working and honest  officer in Scale III, the same CMDs and EDs shamelessly ask what is your total experience of working in a branch.  If they have decided to deny him promotion, he will be told that you do not have sufficient experience of working in branch.  I wonder why nobody asked such questions to them during their elevation from Scale I to Scale VII.    If this is not FARCE, than what we will call FARCE.    Moreover, there is no higher weightage given to people who have worked in a bigger banks. A review of the present trends will indicate that people from smaller banks have risen to become CMDs and EDs at a much faster pace than the people working in bigger banks like PNB. 
 (D) No weightage to Seniority even after selection in the panel :  Even after selection in a panel, there is no criteria for giving weightage to seniority.   We will see that from a panel of the selected persons, suddenly a junior most will be given first as the posting than the senior most post.   Even in the latest list of promotions from GMs to EDs, a number of juniors have already been posted as EDs almost four months back whereas some very senior GMs (rather Chief General Managers) from the same bank have been denied the postings till date.   What is the criteria ?  Nobody can explain the same.   There appears to be utter chaos and nepotism in the posting from the finally selected candidates.   Sometime good candidates although selected get never posted and new panel is created.  Once a panel is created, what is problem in adhering to seniority.   This kind of arbitrariness brings corruption and heart burning among honest  officers




Latest FARCE : Fate of Lastest Selection Process : It is a complete FARCE :  The interviews for selection of new CMDs in six Public Sector Banks were conducted on 12th January, 2012 in a great hurry and the reports indicated at that time that list will be out maximum within 8 to 10 days or so.   Now even after a lapse of 8 months, nobody is sure when will be the list declared.  Similarly, interviews for filling up posts of EDs was held towards end of January 2012.   Then suddenly some candidates were posted as EDs whereas others have been left in the lurch.  We have been covering the latest developments in our Hot Talks as nobody gets any authenticated news but only rumors and overheard talks.  Keeping such postings in limbo only encourages nepotism and corruption as candidates whose names are floating to be approved have to continuous keep their political bosses happy so that there name is not dropped from the final list.   A Branch manager is expected to sit late, sometimes even for whole night, to complete a proposal, but our PM, FM can sit on a file for 8 months for which interviews have been completed and nothing is pending.   Therefore, I am forced to say it is FARCE, FARCE and only FARCE.





I can write many more instances of this FARCE, but  may be, I have a taken VRS at only AGM level  (which is considered as a junior level when viewed by EDs and CMDs) and thus many higher level officers may find it difficult to digest my writings.   Therefore, I stop here and once again quote below from the  Business Standard  article which I feel still reflects my views in better words than what I would have written (as these are not my words, I hope senior bankers will not curse me directly!!) :-




Conclusion :   "So, for all practical purposes there is no framework for selection of the top executives of nationalised  banks. As a result, political parties step in to influence the decisions.



"You really cannot blame the bankers. This is a complete rule of the jungle and the bankers often approach a political leader for a favour as there is no choice. Had there been a uniform formula for selection, no one would have dared to seek help from the political bosses," says an HRD professional in the banking industry.




In the private sector, either the CMD is groomed within the organisation and exposed to  various facets of banking before reaching the top, or headhunters look for the right candidates once the incumbent CMD calls it a day.     A series of interviews and group discussions spread over weeks or even months are the necessary ingredients of the selection process.   And once the CMD takes over, the board continuously evaluates performance.     In stark contrast, the performance of executives of nationalised banks is under the glare of the board till the level of EDs, and once an ED becomes a chairman, people stop looking at his report card".



(I ,Danendra Jain,add my views here _    As a matter of fact , interview is the tool which is used by selecting team to pick up officers of their choice for higher post in all scales, in all cadres and for all post. It is used invariably to remove good officers from key posts and post flatterers at key posts so that game of corruption continues uninterrupted. My blogs used to enlighten on this burning topic from time to time which makes all possible efforts  to stop flattery and bribery in offices and ministries. Abolishing Interview system for all types of promotions may serve the purpose to some extent.)






Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Deposit and Credit Grwoth Will be Subsued and Growth IN Bad ASSETs Will Be Enormous


In the year 2007 -20008 Reputed Rating Agency had assigned best credit ratings to world reputed Financial giants like Lehman Brothers and AIG just a few days before these sickness of companies surfaced and came into light .In following few days and months USA and UK faced the severest financial crisis declared several stimulus packages to dilute the effects of the then deepening crisis. India was also not decoupled from the crisis which erupted and engulfed USA and UK during that period.

Without any delay, our learned finance ministers and our government took preventive steps to save India from the ill effects of crisis of USA and UK.. Indian government also announced several stimulus packages to help Indian corporate giants and also to Indian banks,

Unfortunately after lapse of almost five years, the same financial crisis is threatening to affect the economy of various countries of the world including India, USA and UK.

Why?

Because, we Indian experts failed to identify the real reasons which contributed predominantly in creating crisis.  We did not realize that it is the bad human beings which were primarily responsible for the crisis. It was the window dressing culture and fraudulent mind of bankers and leaders in the government who wanted to show progress by manipulation and by ill methods of manipulation. Corrupt game played by government officials, politicians and bankers is now getting exposed and despite all efforts of RBI and Ministry of Finance, there is no chance of any improvement visible to unbiased thinkers.

Indians believes in Chartered Accountants who certify books of accounts as soon as  they are paid abnormal fees .Indian financial analysts have faith on credit rating agencies who can assign best credit rating to a company if they are paid attractive fees. Indian administration and politically powerful personalities manage lending to their kith and kin, their relatives and their friends. It is in India only that the bank officers are selected for the key and sensitive post of Branch Manager and Regional Head not on the basis of their ability to lend but on the ability of their ability to earn bribe and share with their bosses.

It is in India only that crores of rupees are spent by state or central government  in providing security to politicians but nothing is spent on providing security to bank officers who are given the responsibility of handling billion of rupees. As such there is no doubt that a larger portion of total lending is done under pressure of some person or the other and hence it is but natural that quantum of bad assets in state run banks will grow year after year.

To add fuel to fire, banks will face huge difficulty now in maintaining same rate of growth in deposit and advances  due to many changes in policy announced by RBI to stop rampant culture of window dressing .

Poorly Paid Bank officers are  threatened not only by their bosses for poor credit growth and for poor deposit growth but also for poor recovery in bad accounts. Bank officers are threatened not only by local goondas and politicians but also by borrowers, there is none to provide safety to them . Officers who are recognized by their bosses not on the basis of their performance but on the basis of their ability to agree to ill advice of their bosses for indulging in window dressing on all parameters.Further due to poor pay  structure they have to depend on bribe money to earn and promote social status and to compete with rich borrowers.

Obviously the assets has to be impaired sooner or the later and finally assets will turn bad in  future, cases of CDR will increase and profitability will be adversely and severely affected.

In brief growth rate of deposits and credit will be poorer and that of NPA will be greater in near future and none can stop this trend at least for a few years until Indian leaders and regulators get success in improving the quality of manpower .

Why low deposit rates may be short-lived for banks

Last week, the country's largest lender State Bank of India (SBI) reduced interest rates on term deposits by as much as 100 basis points, but hardly anyone said that it is the beginning of a trend. On the contrary, many said that banks may be forced to take a U-turn in a few months or quarters if the government succeeds in what it aspires to do - revive economic growth.
The fact that deposits growth rate is bumping around a near decade low and nearly three-fourth of the economic activity is funded by the banks, unlike markets in the West, low deposit rates may be short lived. Also, investors have shown their reluctance to be dictated by the administration by moving away to real assets such as gold and real estate in times of negative real returns, which amounts to losing money after adjusting for inflation.

Yes, the incremental credit-to-deposits ratio is at 30% in the absence of demand for new loans from hobbled businesses, but it may be a temporary phenomenon.

The overall loans-to-deposits ratio still remains at 75%, reflecting that out of every Rs 100 as deposits, Rs 75 has been lent. With banks mandated to own at least 23% in government bonds and 4.75% in cash with the Reserve Bank of India, banks are relying on other sources of funds to lend. These ratios will never match. Banks, in their eagerness to please investors, have, in the past few years, raised short-term deposits, (which are low cost), and lent long term for building power plants and roads.

Why low deposit rates may be short-lived for banks



With many of these borrowers not in a position to repay now, banks will come under pressure to repay depositors. So, to ensure that they don't default, banks have to keep mobilising deposits at higher rates even if they don't have much demand for loans. Also, SBI may be an exception in attracting deposits as safety-loving savers prefer bank deposits, especially SBI, to rivals or equities. "Several other banks in the system do not have excess deposits," said Jahangir Aziz, chief Asia economist, JPMorgan Chase. "And, these banks will unlikely cut their deposit rates materially," he added.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/banking/finance/banking/why-low-deposit-rates-may-be-short-lived-for-banks/articleshow/16359947.cms

Fear grips public sector banks

Investigations of bank lending to the telecom, mining, real estate has stalled decision-making
Mumbai: India’s public sector banks seem to be in the grip of a fear psychosis after a series of investigations by government agencies of bank lending to the telecom, mining and real estate sectors. This has stalled decision-making at the lenders that account for close to three-quarters of the banking industry’s assets.
Allegations of irregularities in the allocation of second-generation (2G) telecom spectrum and licences and in the offer of coal mines to companies for captive use have led to multiple investigations.
The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) has estimated notional losses to the exchequer atRs.1.76 trillion because of the allotment, rather than auction, of spectrum, and Rs.1.86 trillion in the doling out of coalfields.
The fallout of investigations into bank lending, coupled with uncertainty in government policies, have snarled up the decision-making process at state-owned lenders because bankers are fearful of being punished for a decision that may go bad. Bankers are also grappling with an uncertain investment climate after the revelations of improprieties and flawed government policies in the allocation of natural resources.
“I will not call it a fear psychosis, but it is a fact that officers are exercising extreme caution. Decision-making has slowed,” said Bhaskar Sen, chairman and managing director (CMD) of Kolkata-based United Bank of India.
Mint spoke to seven senior bankers for this news report, and most of them requested anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the matter.
“This is unfair. Every time we are targeted. We are subject to CVC (Central Vigilance Commission) probes. Private sector bankers also do irresponsible lending, but they are not under any scanner. Most of us now prefer to sit idle,” said the chairman of a large government bank.
“If something goes wrong in a private bank, the official involved gets suspended, but a public sector banker is haunted till his death for a business decision that goes bad. He is deprived of his post-retirement benefits,” the chairman said.
As of 27 July, Indian banks had loans outstanding of just above Rs.36,600 crore to the mining and quarrying sector, and Rs.93,170 crore to the telecommunications sector. These figures were Rs.27,190 crore and Rs.90,770 crore, respectively, a year ago.
The banks are running the risk of a chunk of these assets going bad. If indeed that happens, they need to set aside money to cover the bad loans and that will affect their profitability.
India’s banking sector came under the lens of various investigative agencies first in 2010 when CAG published its report on spectrum allocation. Banks became cautious about their exposure to the telecom sector when the Supreme Court, in February, cancelled 122 telecom licences and 2G spectrum allocated in 2008 on the grounds that the allotment process was flawed. In August, CAG cited irregularities in the allotment of 57 coal blocks to private parties.
Bankers said a sense of insecurity has gripped even mid-level executives, who are putting off decisions on critical transactions. “We are afraid and business is hampered a lot,” said a senior official in charge of corporate loans at a Mumbai-based state-run bank.
The telecom and mining sectors apart, lending to real estate, too, came under stress after the Central Bureau of Investigation in 2010 arrested several bank officials, busting a corporate loan racket.
Banks typically adopt a consortium approach while lending to large projects in such sectors.
“Borrowers have become too large these days. There is a problem in monitoring the end-use of the funds. All members of the consortium expect that the lead bank will take care and monitor the projects, but often that does not happen,” said an executive director at a public sector bank.
“Banks are cautious on infrastructure because of the issues with coal linkages and supply constraints. Banks like us always lend to these sectors through syndication with other banks after studying the project. We will continue to look at coal linkages and gas linkages before giving loans,” said Abraham Chacko, executive director, Federal Bank Ltd.
Analysts said a cautious approach adopted by the bankers has already begun to impede credit flows to crucial sectors. “Bankers have already become cautious when lending to sectors linked to infrastructure. They are selective in lending to these sectors and credit flow has slowed,” said S. Ranganathan, head of research at Mumbai-based brokerage firm LKP Securities Ltd.
Mounting bad loans are a major concern of the banking system. Indian banks’ non-performing assets (NPAs) rose 46% to Rs.1.37 trillion in fiscal 2012.
Credit demand is likely to remain muted, said Nilanjan Karfa, an analyst at Brics Securities Ltd. “I don’t think banks will be able to substitute credit demand from the infrastructure sector because consumption demand has slowed. The contribution from the infrastructure sector has declined. I, therefore, expect credit growth for fiscal 2013 to ease to 13-14%, much below the 17% estimate of the Reserve Bank of India,” Karfa said.
Canara Bank and Central Bank of India have already cut credit growth targets for fiscal 2013. Both lenders now expect growth to be around 15% from about 18-20% projected earlier.
S.L. Bansal, CMD of Oriental Bank of Commerce, however, has a different take on the matter. “So far, no account, neither in telecom nor in coal, has become an NPA,” he said. “Bankers have gone by the strict norms while lending to these companies; there is nothing that we should fear.”


It's time markets evaluated the credit rating agencies

ROOPA KUDVA MD and CEO, Crisil 
A recent interview by Deepak Parekh in the 'Times of India' newspaper carried the headline "Let the raters be rated". Others, too, have expressed similar sentiments. We could not agree more with them. India's rating industry is of quarter-century vintage.

It's time markets made a relative evaluation of the credit rating agencies (CRAs). Let us take the discussion forward and examine how one evaluates a CRA.

A credit rating is an opinion on the relative degree of risk of timely payment of interest and principal on a debt obligation. Ratings provide benchmarks toinvestors for measuring and pricing credit risk. As investors are the primary users of ratings, we believe they are best-placed to rate the raters.

Investors must distinguish between CRAs and stop equating ratings of all agencies. Here is a framework of 10 simple things investors should examine while evaluating a CRA.

- The simplest and best report card of a CRA's performance is its published default and rating stability rates. Here, investors will see that there is a clear differentiation between Indian CRAs. Do ensure the data covers the entire history of the CRA and business cycles.

- Does the CRA recognise defaults on time (as soon it is aware of a default), and downgrade ratings to "D"? Sebi has prescribed the norm for downgrading the rating to "D - default". But, there are companies which have already gone into corporate debt restructuring and still do not carry a "D" rating from some CRAs.

- How aligned are the CRA's criteria towards investor protection? Does it treat FCCBs as debt and not equity? Does it insist on liquidity back-up plans for confidence-sensitive instruments like commercial paper? For large groups, does it consolidate group companies which impact the credit quality of the rated company?

- Does the CRA consistently provide " rating outlooks" on all its ratings? Every long-term rating should have an "outlook" ("stable", "positive" or "negative"), indicating the possible direction of movement of a rating over the medium term.

- Does the CRA have a robust surveillance process and regularly updates all rating reports?

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/opinion/guest-writer/its-time-markets-evaluated-the-credit-rating-agencies/articleshow/16360341.cms

Why we need better economics

Written By  

 Swaminathan S A Aiyar

In Washington DC, a fellow bus traveller asked about my job. I said I was an economist. "Oh" he said in disgust "you economists don't know nothing." 

This was a cruel, yet accurate comment. The world is staggering under multiple problems, but economists of all stripes have failed to come up with convincing remedies. 

Once, Alan Greenspan was viewed as a know-all, second only to God. He opined it was difficult to say when a market bubble had formed, so it's better to let bubbles burst and clean up afterwards. Ben Bernanke, his successor, repeated this philosophy. In effect, this guaranteed huge private gains in the cyclical upswing, but government rescues in the downswing. The public is now baying for the blood of financiers who profited from the Bernanke Put. 

No economist has produced a convincing theory of how to spot a bubble early, or engineer several small recessions to prevent a super- recession. If at the sign of market exuberance politicians are told to deliberately engineer a slowdown costing jobs and incomes, they will say you are mad, and that your suggestion would be political suicide. 

In India, RBI Governor YV Reddy got credit for tightening credit and real estate regulations during the boom. Yet the stock market in India rose seven-fold and the real estate market even faster. Central bankers' theories and tools look very weak today: raising interest rates has not cured inflation in India, and cutting them has not yielded growth in the US or Europe. 

Eugene Fama's efficient markets hypothesis once seemed likely to fetch him a Nobel Prize, but is now widely derided. Yet there is no clear rival theory. Merely saying financial markets need more regulation is not enough.

In 2008, financial markets were the most regulated of all US markets, with over 12,000 financial regulators. If a giant financial bubble and bust nevertheless occurred, the problem was not lack of regulation but the wrong regulations.

Everybody agrees there were gross financial excesses in 2001-08. But there is still no consensus on how much leverage is safe, breaking up banks that are too big to fail, and separating investment banking from retail banking. 

Disagreement on macroeconomics is as deep and frustrating. The world economy is floundering five full years after the subprime crisis of 2007. Democrat-economists like Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz claim the way out is a bigger stimulus. But cumulative fiscal deficits for five years, the mother of all stimuli, have raised US national debt by over $ 5 trillion without reviving decent growth or reducing unemployment below 8%. Republican economists cite this as clear proof that Keynesian deficits have failed. 


Krugman and Stiglitz say the problem is not too much but insufficient stimulus, and want even more. Critics compare this to Marxist apologists claiming that the Soviet Union's collapse was caused not by too much but too little communism, and that an additional dose would have done the trick.

I personally am reminded of a Laxman cartoon showing a Minister beating a tiger skin with a stick, saying it will come alive if stimulated hard enough. Yet conservative economists preaching prudence and reduced fiscal deficits have not fared much better.

US Republicans are dead against Keynesian stimuli for building roads and bridges, but if you suggest cutting defence projects, they protest that this will cost jobs! Krugman rightly calls this weaponised Keynesianism. 

Greece and other troubled Eurozone nations first tried to stimulate their way to success. When that failed, they resorted to austerity. Alas, austerity reduced growth and revenue, and so fiscal deficits stayed high. Both stimulus and austerity failed. 

Economists like Martin Wolf say the European Central Bank must print enough euros to rescue troubled Eurozone economies. This is a short-term fix, but cannot rectify the fundamental problem of a monetary union without a fiscal union.

The European Central Bank and US Fed have already pumped trillions into their respective markets, and the day of reckoning will come soon in the form of inflation. Krugman finds that acceptable. But others will call it a betrayal. 

The UK has attempted to stimulate growth through austerity, hoping that budgetary rectitude and spending cuts would revive animal spirits in business and restart fast growth. Alas, Britain has gone into double diprecession, with Krugman chortling "I told you so." 

The Baltic States are contrarian examples. They accepted a sharp dip of up to 25% in GDP during the Great Recession, and have now recovered. Yet their recovery is weak, and the steepness of the initial crash would have been called failed economics in most democracies. The Baltic States are small economies linked through trade and investment with the Scandinavian nations, which grew reasonably fast after 2008.

Others have not been so fortunate. China, India and other emerging markets were initially amused by the Eurozone's travails, and patted themselves on the back for surviving the Great Recession. But their economies have all slowed sharply this year, ending complacent expectations of a return to fast growth. 

Structural factors have defeated both fiscal expansion and compression. Economists do not know enough about these structural factors to prescribe convincing remedies. Protectionist sentiment in most countries is rising as conventional economics, both rightist and leftist, fails to deliver jobs or growth. We need a better economics.

Monday, September 10, 2012

CVC Penalises 203 Officers , But None Could Penalise a Single Politician


CVC penalises 203 govt officials on corruption charges



NEW DELHI: As many as 203 government officials, including 20 from the department of telecommunications, have been penalised by theCentral Vigilance Commission on corruption charges.

Of these, a highest of 21 are working in Indian Overseas Bank, 16 each in Punjab National Bank, Union Bank of India and ministry of railways and 15 in Central Board of Excise and Customs, the CVC said in its performance report for July.

The penalised officials included eight from the ministry of coal, seven of Delhi Development Authority (DDA), five of Municipal Corporation of Delhi and six of UCO Bank, among others.

"The commission advised imposition of major penalty against 33 officials of various ministries, departments or organisations including one joint secretary and legal adviser of Department of Legal Affairs, one IAS officer (Ex-vice chairman, DDA), one general manager(P) of Air India," it said.

The chief technical examiner's wing of the commission also submitted five technical examination reports which resulted in recovery of about Rs 1.34 crore during July.

The CVC had processed 2,832 complaints (including 67 from whistleblowers) during the month and sought investigation or factual report in 45 complaints from the ministries or departments concerned.

The probity watchdog also gave 34 vigilance clearances for empanelment of board-level appointments.

The commission is concerned over continuing delay in filling the post of chief vigilance officers in MMTC Ltd and Steel Authority of India Ltd (SAIL), the statement said.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/CVC-penalises-203-govt-officials-on-corruption-charges/articleshow/16335623.cms


Political parties log Rs 4,662 cr income

Political parties in India have 'earned' a whopping Rs 4,662 crore through donation and other sources since 2004 with the ruling Congress at the top with an income of Rs 2,008 crore followed by BJP at Rs 994 crore, two NGOs claimed today.
Relying on the IT returns and list of donors submitted to the Election Commission for the period 2004-2011, Association for Democratic Reforms and National Election Watch released a report on the income of 23 major parties.
They said the income of parties showed a steady growth since 2004. Congress' earnings went up from Rs 222 crores in 2004 to Rs 307 crores in 2011 as is the case with BJP.
The figures complied by ADR and NEW show that Congress' income is Rs 2,008 crores, mostly through selling of 'coupons', since it began heading a government at the Centre in 2004 till 2011 though the percentage of donations is just 14.42 per cent.
On the contrary, 81.47 per cent of BJP's total income of Rs 994 crore in the past 7 years came through donations from corporate houses and trusts owned by major firms, including London-listed Vedanta, the NGO said.
The NGOs said donations and voluntary contributions seem to be one of the major sources of income for most of the political parties and demanded more transparency in functioning of electoral trusts run by corporates and that political parties must be declared as public authorities.
"It is a black box of the political parties. Basic source of corruption in this country is political funding. By regulating political funding, we cannot end corruption, but can make a major dent," Prof Jagdee Chhokar, Founder member of ADR, told a press conference here.
Interestingly, General Electoral Trust (GET) of the Aditya Birla Group and Torrent Power Limited have given donations to both Congress and BJP. While the GET gave Rs 36.4 crore as donations to Congress, it contribured Rs 26 crore to the BJP's coffers, according to the report.
While national parties like Congress and BJP got donations from corporate houses and trusts, regional outfits like the DMK have received lakhs of ruppees as donation from its own partymen.
Surprisingly, the CPI(M)'s income from 2004-2011 is Rs 417 crore, mostly contributions from individuals who have given less than Rs 20,000 each, just behind BSP's 484 crore, while other major Left party, CPI, has earned only Rs 6.7 crore. The SP's income, according to ADR, is Rs 278 crores.
ADR and NEW said these figures were collected after a protracted battle with political parties and Income Tax Department through the Right to Information Act.
Other major donators to Congress are Torrent Power Limited (Rs 14.15 crore), Bharti Electoral Trust of Airtel (Rs 11 crore), Tata's Electoral Trust (Rs 9 crore), Sterlite Industries (Rs 6 crore, ITC (Rs 5 crore), Adani Enterprises, Jindal Steel and Videocon Appliances.
Again, GET has been the major contribuor to BJP's income by donating Rs 26 crore, followed by Torrent Power Limited (Rs 13 crore), and Public and Politial Awareness Centre, which the NGos claimed belong to Vedanta, (Rs 9.5 crore).
Another interesting fact that emerged was Asianet TV holding gave Rs 10 crore to BJP and Rs 2.5 crore to Congress in the past seven years.
The NGOs also said 18 regional or state parties have never filed their contribution reports to the Election Commission since 2004. Prominent among them include National Conference of J&K, Trinamool Congress and INLD.
The income of other parties are NCP (Rs 160 crore), AIADMK (Rs 59 crore), SAD (Rs 25 crore), National Conference (Rs 21 crore), JD(U) (Rs 26 crore), TDP (53 crore), DMK (Rs 40 crore), Trinamool (Rs 9 crore), Shiv Sena (Rs 32 crore), LJP (Rs 4 crore) TRS and RLD (Rs 10 crore each), Forward Bloc (Rs 98 lakh) and Sikkim Democratic Front (Rs 92 lakh), the least among all.
While BSP has declared that it has not received any donations above Rs 20,000, the CPI said its leaders A B Bardhan and D Raja contributed Rs 65 lakh and Rs 21 lakh respectively by collecting donations from various sources.
The NGOs also alleged that some of the companies whose names have been cropped up in the mining scam have also contributed to the political parties.
It also alleged that FRCA rules have also been flouted by parties which received donations from foreign-listed companies.
During 2009-2011, the TRS has 99.98 per cent of its income coming from donations followed by JD(U) and LJP.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/political-parties-log-rs-4-662-cr-income/1000538/0

Sunday, September 9, 2012

After 20 Years A Bank Employee Gets Justice, No Punishment To Person Who Made Life Miserable for 20 Years


Man accused of cheating bank acquitted after 20 yrs
Collected from the Newspaper Hindustan Times
New Delhi, September 10, 2012



After two decades of legal process, a CBI special court here has acquitted a former bank employee of charges of cheating. On June 30, 1992, an FIR was registered against Chandrapur resident Arunkumar Balaji Mohitkar (now 69), who was then working as an officer in-charge of administration and service department in Bank of India's (BoI) Ranapratap Nagar branch, for allegedly cheating the bank of Rs. 4,275.

He was alleged to have conspired with another accused Anand Pawagi, working as a sales representative at Remington Rand of India Ltd. The duo was accused of establishing a partnership firm, Usha Agencies, and falsely showing it as an authorised dealer of Remington.
It was alleged that Mohitkar placed an order for some cabinets, furniture and other articles with Usha Agencies, for the bank during 1984-86, which caused a loss of Rs. 4,275 to the bank.
During trials, Mohitkar's counsel contended that orders for supply of items were given by higher authorities and the firm Usha Agencies belonged to Mohitkar's father and he had no involvement in it.
In its order pronounced last week, the court of special judge VK Murkute observed that CBI has failed to prove that Mohitkar was pioneer of registration of Usha Agencies and that he had placed the orders for cabinets, furniture and other items.
The court also stated that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused had got wrongful pecuniary gains through these dealings and therefore absolved him of all charges.