Perfidious Designs of UPA 2 Govt

People's Democracy (Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)

Vol. XXXV No. 47 November 20, 2011

Editorial

 

Perfidious Designs of UPA 2 Govt

 

 

THE fact that the government had decided to reduce the price of petrol by around Rs 2 per litre on the eve of the winter session of parliament sends out a seemingly positive signal that this decision was taken in order to brace itself from facing the onslaught of the opposition and may be some of its own (apart from hypocritical Trinamul Congress) allies in the UPA.  While this may mercifully appear as the government being sensitive to its constitutional obligation of being  accountable to the parliament, it masks a more perfidious design. 

 

The perfidy lies in the UPA-2 government’s loyal adherence to a Machiavellian dictum: `first show the people the worst that you are capable of and then proceed to dilute it.  The people shall then heave a sigh of relief’. 

 

This government is, of course, capable of even worse.  But the perfidy lies in its justification for the reduction in the price.  The government has argued that since the international price of crude oil has fallen, therefore, it has reduced the price of petrol.  If anything, the price of crude oil at the international benchmark, Brent, was on November 4, 2011, when the price was hiked, $ 112.22 a barrel.  As we go to press, on November 16, 2011, this price stood at $ 115.61.  If these are the facts and if such is the logic of the government, then the prices of petroleum products should have constantly declined rather than being increased.  Further, the rupee per dollar has become more expensive rising from around 47 to close to 52 during the last month.  This makes the rupee value of petroleum products more expensive!

 

The hike in the rates of petroleum products in India have, in fact, very little to do with the fluctuations in the international market.  In January 2011, when the price of petrol was increased by Rs 2.5/litre, the cost per barrel was close to $99.  In May when the price was hiked by Rs 5/litre, the cost fluctuated between $ 110 and 115. Keeping aside the 0.33 paise/litre hike in July, the September hike of Rs. 3.14/litre took place when the cost fluctuated between $ 105 and 108 per barrel. 

 

Clearly, these hikes have been affected, as argued in this column last week, primarily to mobilise additional revenue for the government exchequer in preparation for the coming annual budget whose primacy appears to be to contain the fiscal deficit.  As argued last week, the entire fiscal deficit can be wiped out if the enormous tax concessions for the corporates and the rich are withdrawn.  This UPA-2 government is using the petroleum sector as its `milch cow’ for its revenues at the expense of the people. In the process, it is unleashing a cascading impact on inflation.

 

This winter session of parliament will be a turbulent one. Apart from the issue of price rise, this session shall also see many a battle on the issue of corruption.  The Left parties shall focus on the unprecedented extra burdens being imposed on the people through this relentless continuous rise in prices of all essential commodities. 

 

Despite all claims of controlling price rise, food inflation is now around 12 per cent. Vegetables are costlier by 26 per cent, pulses by 14 per cent, fruits by 12 per cent, eggs, fish and meat by 13 per cent and milk by 12 per cent. In other words, the daily life existence of the aam admi  continues to come under severe assaults.   

 

On the issue of corruption in high places, the parliamentary standing committee is examining the bill on the Lokpal and Lokayuktas. While we shall have to wait for its recommendations, some of these brazen instances of humongous corruption continue to remain under investigation by various authorities including those under the supervision of the apex court.  The parliamentary public accounts committee and the joint parliamentary committee are examining the 2G spectrum scam. 

 

Even the ineffective measures undertaken by the government in the name of controlling inflation, like the monetary policies of increasing interest rates, are coming under attack by India Inc as measures that are dampening the investment climate in the country. They seek cheaper and more ready access to funds.  However, little of such available funds have gone into productive investments precisely because the purchasing power amongst the people is sharply declining, lowering the levels of domestic demand.  Most of these funds have, instead, gone into speculative trading which, on the one hand, pushes up the prices of commodities and, on the other, maximises profit.  Or, such funds have gone as the flight of capital to be tucked away in safe tax havens abroad, or, in accumulating gold and other valuables.  India Inc wants more such funds to maximise their profits through speculation rather than allow such funds to be spent through public investments to build our much-needed infrastructure and generate jobs in the economy enlarging the purchasing power of the people. 

 

Their cries for further financial reforms found an echo in the decision of the union cabinet, as we go to press, to permit, for the first time, a 26 per cent foreign direct investment in the pension sector.  If approved by parliament, this will give international finance capital (IFC) access to roughly $ 12 billion of assets today that are in the pension fund.  The expectations of India as an `emerging economy’ further raises the predatory aspirations of IFC to reap super speculative profits from India. 

 

UPA-1 had introduced the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority Bill in 2005. Due to the opposition by the Left parties whose support was crucial for the survival of that government, this never saw the light of the day.  Along with this, the Left’s refusal stopped liberal financial reforms in the banking and the insurance sectors.  It is precisely because of this role played by the Left that India remained relatively protected from the devastating impact of the global financial meltdown in 2008.  If India today prides itself for having braced the global economic slowdown and recessionary conditions, so far, it is primarily because of this role of the Left parties during the UPA-1.

 

Under pressure from the IFC and India Inc, the UPA-2 government may well get the pension funds legislation passed through the parliament with the able and vocal support of the BJP.  Crores of employees who remained relatively protected so far from the global financial turbulence will now be exposed to such vulnerability adversely impacting their livelihood status. The Left is committed to strongly oppose such reforms for financial liberalisation in the interests of Indian people and the fundamentals of our economy. 

 

This coming winter session of the parliament will, therefore, be a stormy one where the Left parties will raise and fight to protect the interests of the people.  This, however, can only be effective when it is combined with the strength of the popular protests and struggles outside.  The Left parties are committed to strengthening such struggles in the days to come. 

(November 16, 2011)

http://pd.cpim.org/

Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)

Vol. XXXIV No. 47 November 20,  2011

CONTROVERSY Land grab projects? LYLA BAVADAM An independent study says some 250 thermal power projects that have got clearances may be meant just to grab land and water resources.

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/stories/20111202282411000.htm

Volume 28 - Issue 24 :: Nov. 19-Dec. 02, 2011INDIA'S NATIONAL MAGAZINE from the publishers of THE HINDU

CONTROVERSY

Land grab projects?

LYLA BAVADAM

An independent study says some 250 thermal power projects that have got clearances may be meant just to grab land and water resources.

B. VELANKANNI RAJ 

Farmers and fisher folkat a rally protesting against the thermal power  projects proposed in Tharangambadi in Nagapattinam district, Tamil Nadu,  in December 2010.

THERE have been a growing number of headlines that speak of an energy crisis and the energy deficit in India in the last few years. The disparities in the demand-supply scenario, the increasing prospects of disruptions in the global supply of fuel and the consequent results of higher import bills, the problems of losses during transmission and distribution and a host of other issues have been debated.

The public sector monopoly over this sector has been blamed for the energy crisis. So, after liberalisation, when the sector was thrown open to private investors, it was generally considered to be a profitable business opportunity. In fact, more than 250 companies have applied for and received environmental clearances to set up thermal power projects in the coming years. In the generally accepted analysis of the energy situation, this seems to be a good thing. But there is another side to the story.

For quite some time there has been talk of a vast number of thermal power projects coming up all over the country, but apart from certain regions, such as the Konkan (Frontline, February 11), where details were available, there was no central database that provided information on the rest. Prayas Energy Group, a non-governmental, non-profit organisation that works on the theoretical, conceptual and policy issues in the energy sector, was curious about the widespread talk about big projects and decided to find out more. (It is worth noting that Prayas was instrumental in the analysis of the infamous power purchase agreement of the Dabhol Power Company.)

Girish Sant of Prayas said he and his colleagues decided to start off by looking at the website of the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) since the Ministry played a part in issuing clearances. Here they found a bulk of information that confirmed much of what they had been hearing. The information was appalling enough for lead authors Shripad Dharmadhikary and Shantanu Dixit of Prayas to dig deeper and publish a report.

“Thermal Power Plants on the Anvil: Implications and Need for Rationalisation” starts with a seemingly straightforward announcement: “A massive expansion of the thermal power generation capacity of the country is on the anvil.” Without much ado, the report then drops the bombshell that the MoEF has liberally granted environmental clearances to about 250 coal- and gas-based thermal power projects that will produce a total of 192,913 MW of power – a proposed capacity that far exceeds the country's projected requirement until 2032! Delving further, they were shocked to discover that there were more projects, yet to be cleared, with the potential to produce, totally, 508,907 MW.

Simple calculations showed the following. As of April, the existing total installed electricity generation capacity in India was 174,361 MW. Of this, the total thermal capacity was 113,000 MW. The green signal from the MoEF for the new plants will result in a capacity increase of about 192,913 MW from coal- and gas-based plants. The pending projects are likely to get clearance because in the last four years the MoEF has made it a point to clear all thermal power proposals.

This means that in the coming years the country can expect to see plants with around 701,820 MW being built. And this is only in the thermal power sector. Coal-based plants account for about 87 per cent of these plants in-waiting. The report says, “These additions are more than six times the currently installed thermal capacity of 113,000 MW. They are also three times the capacity addition that would be required to meet the needs of the high-renewables-high efficiency scenario for the year 2032 projected by the Planning Commission Integrated Energy Policy report.”

With this basic information in hand, the MoEF's green signal seemed all the more baffling. It could be argued that this was strategic future planning, but there was something about the clearing of the capacity of a mammoth 192,913 MW of power that held the attention of the authors. Coming up against bureaucratic roadblocks, they filed a Right to Information (RTI) plea addressed to the Environment Impact Assessment Centre of the MoEF, asking how so many thermal power projects were given clearance. The response said that if the site of a project was not found to be appropriate the promoters were asked to change it. Thus, in effect, a project was never rejected – merely asked to change location.

The MoEF, for its part, reiterated that environmental clearances were given after the Ministry was satisfied that environmental planning was part of the future projects.

Studying the issue even more closely, the researchers came to a conclusion that may seem anti-development, but, when studied closely, makes a strong argument for itself. They concluded that “with large areas of land being acquired for these projects, and water being allocated for these unnecessary plants, this may turn out to be a land and water grab story.” They noted that the clearing of so many gigantic projects “indicates a complete disconnect between the government's actions in the power sector and the actual power needs of the country”.

The location of the projects were also suspect, the authors found. Out of a total of 626 districts in the country, it is inexplicable why the projects are being sited in only 30 (4.7 per cent of the total number of districts). Fifteen districts have plants with capacities totalling 10,000 MW or more each. And several districts are contiguous, which will increase the impact of the plants.

The Central and State sectors have about 82 per cent share in the existing thermal power plants. But the private sector accounts for 67 per cent of the proposed projects. So intense is the corporate interest that 10 private companies account for 160,000 MW of the total mega wattage. Among the 10 are Reliance, Adani, Welspun, Essar, Indiabulls, Tata Power and Vedanta. Attempts to contact Reliance and Tata Power, the two largest investors in the list, proved fruitless.

It is now not uncommon for large corporations to buy up vast tracts of land. Some years ago a prominent real estate dealer of Mumbai told this correspondent that he had been instructed by his client, one of the country's largest corporations, to buy land anywhere in India as long as it was over 10 acres (one acre is 0.4 hectare) and had a water source. Knowing that land would be the most valuable commodity in the future, the company wanted to hold the aces at the appropriate time. Interestingly, the company in question is one of the top 10 on the list of corporates wanting to set up thermal power plants.

The allocation of land, coal and water is a major concern. The report argues: “These projects in the pipeline represent a massive overcapacity in the making. Thus, valuable and scarce natural resources of land, water, gas and coal will be allocated to projects that are ultimately not required.”

Land for such gigantic projects is invariably acquired forcibly with the government applying the Land Acquisition Act citing public purpose. The authors wryly say, “Given that the thermal capacity in pipeline is far in excess of that required, it is clear that many of these plants will not serve a public purpose. Hence, the use of the Act to acquire land for such plants cannot be justified.” The current Act is so structured that there is no provision to return the land once acquired to the original owner even if the project does not materialise. In such a case, the promoters can use the land for their own profit. The researchers say, “Some of the plants may even be promoted primarily to obtain such benefits.”

Almost 85 per cent of the projects in the pipeline are coal-based. A large proportion of them rely on domestic coal which is in short supply – even existing power plants do not get their full requirement. Obviously, supplying new plants will spread the resource even thinner, ultimately resulting in coal imports. No study has been done about the coal reserves in the country.

Sant told Frontline that there were about 20 to 40 giga tonnes of coal reserves but their location was not clear. If they are in forest reserves, then they are in a no-go area for mining. He said that if the reserves were no more than 40 giga tonnes, the coal would run out by 2030. Clearly, there has been a lacuna in planning; these proposed projects are mere ghosts and the actual aim is to grab land and water resources. There is also a health issue involved – Indian coal is very high in mercury content. Currently there are no limits set for mercury emissions from power plants, though this can have grave consequences for the brain, the heart, kidneys, lungs and the immune system.

Allocation of water rights is the other contentious issue. Coal plants are notorious for using as much as four litres of water per kWh of generation. About 72 per cent of the cleared plants are inland and about half of these are in the river basins of the Ganga, the Godavari, the Mahanadi and the Brahmani. Even presuming that a river basin can supply the needs of the thermal power plant, it is not acceptable because it would most likely be eating into the water share of the local populace. And given the vagaries of the weather, there will invariably be conflict in times of drought. Who then gets priority – the power plant or the local people? Past experience with the privatisation of water, as in the Sheonath river case in Madhya Pradesh, has shown that priority is invariably given to corporate interests.

The report “estimates that the consumptive water needs of the plants with Environmental Clearance Granted will themselves be close to 4.6 billion cubic metres per year. In these circumstances, several water conflicts appear to be in the making.” Here, too, there is an example from the past. Neither the industry nor local people will benefit if water supply stops as had happened in April last year in Chandrapur district where the Maharashtra State Electricity Board had to shut down its plant on account of water shortage. Ironically, Chandrapur is slated to have plants with a total capacity of 8,000 MW.

Again, using a thumb rule from the Central Electricity Authority, Prayas estimates that coal-based plants consume about 3.92 million cubic metres of water per 100 MW per annum. There are such plants for 117,500 MW inland. This means these plants will require about 4,608 million cubic metres of water. That is enough to “irrigate about 920,000 ha of land in a year or provide drinking and domestic use water to about 84 million people or 7 per cent of India's population every day for a year”, the report says.

In 2009, the MoEF used the Comprehensive Environmental Pollution Index and identified some areas in the country as “critically polluted”. Shockingly, a total capacity of 88,000 MW of the proposed thermal projects is located within or near these Critically Polluted areas. Coal-based thermal power plants are infamous for sulphur dioxide emissions, coal ash disposal issues and the release of toxins such as mercury, arsenic, lead and cadmium. Even if there are regulations (in the case of sulphur dioxide, these are not even clear) it is doubtful whether the air and water supply will be able to dispose and disperse the mammoth emissions. In the past, dykes of ash ponds have collapsed resulting in ash slurry inundating areas. But even stored coal ash is hazardous because it affects ground and surface water supply as well as ambient air.

Playing the devil's advocate, Prayas argues that the delicensing of thermal power generation will automatically mean that market forces will “weed out excess and inefficient capacity”. In other words, even if plants have got the clearance and resources are allocated to them, they will be governed by the market. While this may be so, it does not take away from the crucial fact that companies may already have got what they wanted – land and water. And, they would have got all this with subsidies. They will have profited even if the plants fail. The real victims will be those who have been displaced for a worthless project, the taxpayers whose money was misused, the environment, and, of course, the country as a whole.

Prayas has called for revamping the clearance process, a moratorium on new clearances, and improved coordination between the different agencies involved. It further recommends that “from the 200,000 MW that have already been given environmental clearance, projects with very high social and environmental impacts, projects that do not have broad local acceptance, and projects leading to sub-optimal use of transmission, fuel, land and water should be put on hold” and a reassessment be made of the long-term demand for power.

Using already available information and that obtained through RTI, Dharmadhikary and Dixit try to prove that the thermal power projects in the pipeline are clearly “a massive overcapacity in the making”. They say this leads to the conclusion that there is an ulterior motive: that of reserving vast expanses of land for future profit.

HIGH COURT NOTICE TO DU ON M.A. (MUSIC) ADMISSION CRITERIA

HIGH COURT NOTICE TO DU ON M.A. (MUSIC) ADMISSION CRITERIA

Delhi High Court (A.K.Sikri ACJ & Rajeev Sahai Endlaw J) on Friday has issued notices to Delhi University, Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Ramjas College and Shri Avinash Kumar Jha on the petition filed by Ms. Babita Rawat through Advocate Ashok Agarwal questioning the validity of the admission criteria for M.A. (Music) (Hindustani Vocal) which solely based on 100% performance at the Entrance Test.  “Rule 3 of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for admissions 2011-12 in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) whereby the merit list is drawn solely on the basis of performance at the entrance test (practical) is arbitrary, discriminatory, unjust, illegal, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Delhi University Act, 1922”, argued Mr. Agarwal.

The petitioner states that she has been denied admission in M.A.(Music) despite the fact that she secured 63% marks in aggregate in B.A.(Music) in the academic year 2011-12 while studying in Ramjas College. She also stated that Avinash Kumar Jha who was not eligible to be even registered for the course has not only been selected but also granted admission in M.A.(Music) in Ramjas College.

“Merit list is drawn solely on the basis of the performance in the entrance test (practical).No written test is taken at all.  Even no record of entrance test (practical) is prepared and maintained by the Selection Committee. The decisions to select candidates are solely at the whims and fancies of the members of the Committee. Such a criteria is open to discrimination, favoritism, arbitrariness and therefore, impermissible in law”, submitted Mr. Agarwal.

Next date of hearing is fixed for 27.01.2011.

Ashok Agarwal, Advocate

M-09811101923

19.11.2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

W.P. (C) NO.  8129 OF 2011

IN THE MATTER OF:                                

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India;

AND

IN THE MATTER OF:                                

Constitutional validity of Rule 3 of Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 of Department of Music, University of Delhi whereby merit list is drawn  solely on the basis of performance at the entrance test (practical) for admission in M.A. (Music);

AND

IN THE MATTER OF:                                

Selection and allotment of seat to Mr. Avinash Kumar Jha in M.A. (Music) in the academic year 2011-12 in violation of Rule 10 of  Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12;

AND

IN THE MATTER OF:             

Inaction on the part of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi to select and to allot seat in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) in the academic year 2011-12;

AND

IN THE MATTER OF:       

Fundamental right to education as guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Delhi University Act, 1922

AND

IN THE MATTER OF:  

                              

1)      Constitution of India

2)      Delhi University Act, 1922

3)      Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12

AND

IN THE MATTER OF: 

Ms. Babita Rawat,

D/o Shri Prem Singh Rawat,

R/o A-5/95, Sector-17,

Rohini,

Delhi-110089                                               .....  Petitioner                                                                     

                                                  Versus

1.       University of Delhi,

          Through its Registrar,

          University Campus,      

Delhi-110 007

2.       Faculty of Music & Fine Arts,

          Through Head of the Department,

          Department of Music,

          University Campus,      

Delhi-110 007

3.       Ramjas College,

          Through Principal,

          University Campus,      

Delhi-110 007

4.       Mr. Avinash Kumar Jha,

          Student of M.A. (Music)

          Through Principal,

          Ramjas College,

          University Campus,      

Delhi-110 007.                                            …Respondents

To

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE

OF HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT

NEW DELHI AND HIS COMPANION

JUSTICES OF THE SAID HIGH COURT

The humble petition of the petitioner above named

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

 

1.       The petitioner by the present writ petition is challenging the constitutional validity of Rule 3, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for admissions 2011-12 of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi whereby the seats are allotted to candidates in M.A. Music (Hindustani) course solely on the basis of entrance test (practical).  The petitioner   is also challenging the validity of selection and allotment of seat to Shri Avinash Kumar Jha, Respondent No.4, in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course in the academic year 2011-12.  The petitioner is further challenging the validity of inaction on the part of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi to select and allot seat in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) in the academic year 2011-12.  It is respectfully submitted that the impugned Rule 3 of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for admissions 2011-12 in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) whereby the merit list is drawn solely on the basis of performance at the entrance test (practical) is arbitrary, discriminatory, unjust, illegal, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Delhi University Act, 1922.  It is also respectfully submitted that the selection and allotment of seat to Shri Avinash Kumar Jha in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course in the academic year 2011-12 is in clear violation of Rule 10 of  the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for admissions 2011-12 of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi.  It is further respectfully submitted that the impugned inaction on the part of  Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi to select and to allot seat in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course to the petitioner in the academic year 2011-12 is arbitrary, unconstitutional, discriminatory, violative of Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi.

2.       The petitioner by the present writ petition has raised the following vital questions of law of general as well as of private importance for determination by this Hon’ble Court:-

(i)      Whether the impugned Rule 3 of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi. Whereby for the purpose of admissions in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course 2011-12 the merit list is drawn solely on the basis of performance at the entrance test (practical) is arbitrary, discriminatory, unjust, illegal,  unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Delhi University Act, 1922 and the ordinances made thereunder ?

(ii)     Whether the selection and allotment of seat to Shri Avinash Kumar Jha in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) in the academic  year 2011-12 is illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unjust, illegal,  unconstitutional and in clear violation of  Rule 10 of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12?

(iii)    Whether the impugned inaction  on the part of  Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi to select and to allot seat in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) in the academic year 2011-12 to the petitioner is  illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unjust, violative of Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Delhi University Act, 1922 and the ordinances made thereunder  and also contrary to the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi?

3.       The facts of the case, so far as relevant for the purposes of the present petition, are given in brief, as under.

4.       The petitioner has passed B.A. (Music) (Hindustani) from Ramjas College, University of Delhi in the academic year 2010-11 and secured 63% marks in aggregate.  It is submitted that being eligible  to be considered for M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course in the academic year 2011-12 in the University of Delhi in terms of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi for admission in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) in the academic year 2011-12.

                   A true copy of the mark sheet and the provisional certificate of the petitioner passing the B.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course in 2010-11 are enclosed herewith and marked asAnnexure-A/Colly.

5.       The petitioner submits that Shri Avinash Kuamr Jha, Respondent No.4 herein, also applied for admission in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course in the academic year 2011-12 in the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, and University of Delhi.  It is respectfully submitted that Shri Avinash Kumar Jha was not eligible to apply for the said course in terms of Rule 10 of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12, Shri Avinash Kumar Jha was not only allowed to appear in the entrance test (practical) but was also selected and allotted a seat in Ramjas College, University of Delhi.

                   A true copy of the mark sheet of Shri Avinash Kumar Jha of B.Com is enclosed herewith as Annexure-B.

6.       The petitioner submits that she along with other candidates were subjected to entrance test (practical) conducted in the month of July, 2011 by Four Members Selection Committee, constituted by the  Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi.   It is submitted that the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi exhibited the first and second list and finally the final list of selected candidates on 5^thAugust, 2011 and the name of the petitioner was not shown in any of these lists. 

                   True copies of the first and third lists of the selected candidates are enclosed herewith as Annexure-C/Colly.

7.       The petitioner submits that she through her father applied for information under Right to Information Act, 2005   consequent therepon the petitioner got the B.Com mark sheet of Shri Avinash Kumar Jha, marks having been obtained by each candidate in the entrance test (practical) which was held in the month of July, 2011 for M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course in the academic year 2011-12.

                   True copies of the details of marks having been obtained by each candidate in the said entrance test (practical) is enclosed herewith as Annexure-D.

8.       The petitioner submits that there are 30 seats in total in the M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course in the University of Delhi in the academic year 2011-12.  It is submitted that on the basis of the marks having been obtained by the candidates in the entrance test (practical), she got 31^st position and Shri Avinash Kumar Jha got 30^th position.

                   The petitioner invite attention of this Hon’ble Court to the impugned Rule 3 of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12  of the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi which is reproduced, as under:-

                   “3.     Admission List:

The merit list is drawn on the basis of the performance at the Entrance Test (practical), B.A. and M.A. separately, for Hindustani and Karnatak Music whereas for M.Phil the marks of entrance test (theory) and practical test will be taken into consideration.  The admissions are made, strictly, in order of merit, subject to availability of seats for the Course, concerned.  The selected candidates for B.A. & M.A. course are required to seek admission to the colleges assigned to them by the Department of Music, on or before the stipulated dates announced in each college, separately.”

          A copy of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 is enclosed as Annexure-E.

9.       The petitioner respectfully submits that in terms of the afore-mentioned Rule 3, merit list is drawn solely on the basis of the performance in the entrance test (practical).  It is submitted that no written test is taken at all.  Even no record of entrance test (practical) is prepared and maintained by the Selection Committee.  It is submitted that the decisions to select candidates is solely at the whims and fancies of the members of the Committee.  It is respectfully submitted that the said impugned Rule 3 is arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal, unjust, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India as the same is open to favoritism, discrimination and corruption.

                   The petitioner invites attention of this Hon’ble Court to Rule 10 of the afore-mentioned Rules which is reproduced as under:-

                  

“10.   Admission of Compartmental Candidates:

(a)              For admission to the M.A. Music Course:

(i)      candidates who have been placed under compartment in one of the papers by the University of Delhi will be allowed to register themselves for provisional admission to M.A. Music Course if they satisfy the prescribed requirements of the course concerned (by adding the minimum pass marks of the paper in which the student has been placed in compartment to the marks obtained in the remaining papers).

(ii)     candidates of Delhi University who have been placed under compartment in one of the concurrent courses and are otherwise eligible for admission to M.A. Music Course shall be permitted to register themselves for provisional admission subject to their passing the examination in concurrent courses, in September/October of the year of admission. 

(iii)    candidates who have been placed under compartment either in concurrent courses or in elective subject, in which they are placed under compartment plus the marks in other subjects, if selected the admission of the students falling under category (i) or (ii), above, shall be provisional subject to their passing the compartmental examination in September/ October of the year of the admission. 

          Students, who fail to pass the compartmental examination in September/October of the years of his/her admission, shall not be allowed to continue on the rolls and their provisional admission shall stand cancelled without any notice to them. 

          Candidates from other Universities, who have been placed under compartment, shall not be eligible for registration/admission.

b.                 For admission to the B.A. (Hons.) Music Course:

(i)                candidate placed under compartment in one subject only at; the Senior School Certificate Examination of the Central Boards of Secondary Education, Delhi or an examination recognized as equivalent thereto of any Statutory University/Board will be eligible for provisional admission in B.A. (Hons.) Music Course if they obtain the required minimum percentage of marks in the aggregate by adding the minimum pass marks of the subject in which the candidate has been placed under compartment, to the marks obtained in remaining subjects.

(ii)     candidates who fail to appear or fail to pass at the Compartmental examination by December of the year of his admission, shall not be entitled to continue on the rolls and their provisional admission will stand cancelled without any notice to them.”

10.     The petitioner submits that Shri Avinash Kumar Jha, Respondent No.4 herein was not eligible to register himself for the provisional admission to M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course as he was not satisfying the prescribed requirement of the course concerned.  It is submitted that Shri Avinash Kumar Jha got compartment in the B.Com Examination 2010-11.  It is submitted that in terms of the Rules and Regulations, he was required to have minimum of 45% of marks in aggregate in B.Com examination which he did not have even by adding the minimum pass marks of the paper in which he had been placed in compartment to the marks obtained in the remaining papers.  It is submitted that by adding the minimum pass marks of the paper in which Shri Avinash Kumar Jha had been passed in compartment to the marks obtained in the remaining papers the aggregate marks comes to 42.14% and therefore been below the minimum 45% marks aggregate required for registration in M.A. (Music) Course.  It is respectfully submitted that Shri Avinash Kumar Jha was not eligible for registration for the said course.

11.     The petitioner therefore, respectfully submits that selection and admission of Shri  Avinash Kumar Jha in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course in the academic year 2011-12 is ab-initio illegal and bad in law and deserves to be set aside by this Hon’ble Court. 

12.     The petitioner respectfully submits that in case the selection and admission of Shri Avinash Kumar Jha, Respondent No.4 herein is quashed by this Hon’ble Court, the petitioner being the next one in the list would be entitled to admission in the said course, in the academic year 2011-12.

13.     The petitioner submits that her father made representations dated 17/24.08.2011 and 06.09.2011 to the Vice Chancellor of Delhi University, the Respondent No.1 herein, thereby requesting them to interfere in the matter to set the things right so that larger interests of genuine students are protected and the respect of the Delhi University is also upheld and maintained in the hearts of millions of citizens.  However, no action was taken by the Respondent No.1 in the matter.

                   True copies of the said representations dated 17/24.08.2011 and 06.09.2011 are enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure-F/Colly.

14.     The petitioner begs to challenge the impugned inactions on the part of the respondents on the following, amongst other, grounds:-

A.      Because the impugned action/inaction on the part of the respondents are  arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional, unjust, violative of Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Delhi University Act, 1922 and the ordinances thereunder.

B.      Because the impugned Rule 3 of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 is open to discrimination, favoritism, discriminatory and arbitrary exercise of powers by the Selection Committee in the matter of selection of candidates in the M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) course because the impugned Rules gives arbitrary and unguided powers to the selection committee to select any candidate at their whims and fancies, no written test of any kind is taken in the matter.  The merit list is prepared on the basis of entrance test (practical) which is contrary to catena of judgments delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme of India and various Hon’ble High Courts of India.  Even assuming though not admitted that selections can be made solely on the basis of entrance test (practical), in absence of any guidelines for the same, such entrance test (practical) would be arbitrary, discriminatory and unconstitutional.  In the present case candidates who were having meritorious record in their B.A. Course were ignored and on the other hand, who were less meritorious record or very poor were selected.  The present criteria and method for selection of candidates for M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course is totally unjustified, unreasonable unfair and irrational.

C.      Because the impugned inaction on the part of the respondent No.2 in selecting Mr. Avinash Kumar Jha in the M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course 2011-12 is arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and in clear violation of Rule 13 of the Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 in terms of which he was not even eligible for registration of his candidature with the Faculty of Music & Fine Arts, Department of Music, University of Delhi.

D.      Because the selection of Mr. Avinash Kumar Jha in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course is ab-initio illegal and contrary to Rule 10 of  Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12.

E.      Because the petitioner was not only eligible but also entitled to be selected for one of the 30 seats in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) Course 2011-12.

F.      Because the impugned action/inaction on the part of the respondents No.1 to 3 are otherwise also bad in law.

 

15.     That the Petitioner has no other efficacious remedy available except to prefer the present Writ Petition.

16.     That the Petitioner has not filed any other similar Writ Petition in this Hon’ble Court or in any other High Courts in India or in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India against the impugned inactions on the part of the Respondents.

17.     That the annexures as annexed hereto are true and correct copies of their respective originals.

PRAYER

In the premise aforesaid, the petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:-

(a)     declare the Rule 3 of Rules, Regulations and Eligibility Conditions for Admissions 2011-12 of Department of Music, University of Delhi, Respondent No.2 herein as illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 15 & 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Delhi University Act, 1922 and strike down the same;

(b)    issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, thereby setting aside the selection and admission of Shri Avinash Kumar Jha, Respondent No.4 herein in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) course in the academic year 2011-12; 

(c)      issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent No1 to 3 to consider the  case of the petitioner for admission in M.A. (Music) (Hindustani) course in the academic year 2011-12;

 (d)    pass any other order or orders as may be deemed just and appropriate, in the interest of justice in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents; and

(e)      allow the present writ petition with cost, in favour of the petitioner. 

Ashok Agarwal,  Kusum Sharma & Anuj Agarwal

Advocates for the Petitioner

483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers,

Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003

Ph: 23384000, Mob-9811101923

Place: New Delhi

Dated: 15.11.2011

 

Agreement for Tipaimukh project signed: Bangladesh not Consulted

Sources: NHPH and the American Association of Bangladeshi Engineers and Architects archive. 

Despite opposition, the National Hydro Power Company has inked a Promoter's Agreement with SJVNL and Government of Manipur for execution of the 1,500 MW Tipaimukh Hydroelectric Project in Manipur.

The Promoter's Agreement was signed in the presence of Union Power Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde, Manipur Chief Minister O Ibobi Singh by chairman and managing director, NHPC ABL Srivastava here on October 22, 2011 without even informing Bangladesh government.

NHPC signed the Promoter's Agreement with SJVN Limited and Government of Manipur for setting up a Joint Venture Company (JVC) for implementation of the project in Manipur.

The Tipaimukh Hydroelectric Project has been conceived as a multipurpose storage project on the Barak river with the main objective of hydropower generation along with flood control on 2039 Square kilometres in the upstream.

In the Bangladesh-India joint communiqué issued during Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's Delhi visit in January 2010, the Indian Premier assured Bangladeshi Prime Minister that `India would not take unilateral steps on the Tipaimukh project that would adversely affect Bangladesh'. But the Indian Prime Minister did not even consider to inform his Bangladeshi counterpart. This disrespect to Bangladeshi Prime Minister by the Indian Prime Minister hurts the feeling of all Bangladeshis worldwide. 

The Barak river has entered into Bangladesh as the Surma and Kushiara on which the country's northeastern region depend heavily for agriculture and livelihood. The construction of the huge dam will dry up the two rivers in the greater Sylhet region while New Delhi assures that the dam would not adversely affect Bangladesh as the multipurpose hydroelectric project has no irrigation component.

Based on initial Indian documents this dam will increase the dry season flow on Surma Basin that will inundate huge arable areas that will reduce the much needed aman and boro rice production. 
Since it's an issue of the national interest on October 2009, the American Association of Bangladeshi Engineers and Architects, Inc. AABEA) invited engineers and scientists with varied backgrounds in a seminar to understand this project from technical, economical, and social view points. The seminar reviewed the concerns and issues including the influence of impacted flows on hydrologic, economical, cultural, social, and ecological balance of the nation. The panel further concentrated its review on impact of rivers and flows originated Tippara Hills which ultimately discharging into Surma Basin. Panel also considered the severe shortage of food grains worldwide and its impact on Bangladesh since there is a shortage of arable farm land and this shortage is increasing every year.

Based on their findings AABEA drew its conclusion and on February 2010 sent all its recommendation to the Prime Minister of Bangladesh. The summary of that recommendation is as follows:

1. Tipaimukh Project should not be constructed without a full treaty with Bangladesh. 
2. The treaty should be modeled like Indus Water Treaty under the auspices of World Bank or United Nations and the treaty must assure that no water will be diverted by India from the Barak River. 
3. The treaty should spell out the operational aspects of the Dam. The operation of the Dam shall not cause widespread inundation of boro crop and release of the water from dam shall not inundate boro crop. In addition, an operational aspect of artificial flooding by pulsating flood of the Sylhet/Mymensingh area to create artificial but controlled flood during rainy season to flush the Haor Basin should be included. The frequency and amount of the pulsating flood should be determined by full hydrologic study of the area by the Bangladeshi experts. 
4. India shall not construct Phulertal Barrage ever to divert water. 
5. India shall sell power to Bangladesh from this project on a long term agreement basis.

Hares Sayed
Washington, DC

PMO sees foreign hand

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2621634.ece?homepage=true

 

 

TIRUNELVELI, November 12, 2011

 

PMO sees foreign hand

STAFF REPORTER

 

The Hindu .

 

V. Narayanasamy, Minister of State in the Prime Minister's Office, said on Saturday that the anti-Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project (KKNP) agitation was being funded by foreign agencies.

 

“We've already started investigation to unmask the foreign agencies actually funding the ongoing agitation against KKNPP even after the nuclear reactors' safety has been ensured by installing futuristic state-of-the-art safety features,” he told reporters here.

 

The country, which would be in need of 4.50 lakh MW power by 2020, was generating only 1.5 lakh MW. Hence, to achieve this goal, it was executing the nuclear power generation programmes, like the U.S., which was getting 20 per cent of its power from nuclear reactors.

 

At the same time, Mr. Narayanasamy said, the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited, which was constructing the reactors with Russian assistance, had incorporated sophisticated safety equipment in the reactors of KKNPP though it consumed considerable time and money.

 

The Minister said the protest was going on even after distinguished scientist and former President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam, after his personal inspection of the plant, had certified that the KKNPP reactors with its safety features were the safest in the world. “However, a group of people were misguiding the people, particularly the fishermen, with false propaganda against the KKNPP as they wanted to cripple its commissioning. Since we suspect the involvement of the foreign agencies in the ongoing protest, we've ordered for a comprehensive probe to unmask the foreign groups that fund those who organise the protest. This is not really a protest being orchestrated by the people,” he charged.

 

When asked to name the foreign agencies funding the protestors, the Minister said: “You know everything”.