Premium
This is an archive article published on November 30, 2010

After SC stinger,CVC Thomas may quit: Sources

The govt wants him to quit on his own,the BJP wants him sacked

Central Vigilance Commissioner P J Thomas may quit the post in the wake of stinging observations from the Supreme Court on his capacity to supervise the CBI probe into the 2G spectrum scam.

Appointed barely less than three months ago,Thomas,whose name still figures in the chargesheet relating to the import of palmolein when he was serving in the Kerala government,is believed to have conveyed his decision to government,sources said.

The decision was taken mutually,the sources said adding it was now now up to Thomas to put in his papers to the President,who is the appointing authority.

Story continues below this ad

60-year-old Thomas,who was Telecom Secretary till recently,was appointed to the CVC’s post by a three-member panel headed by Prime Minister but not before the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj,gave a dissenting note.

The BJP had strongly objected to his appointment citing the criminal case pending against him in Kerala in the palmolein import case.

Yesterday,Thomas had met Chidambaram,who was also a member of the committee that chose his name for the post,that fuelled speculation that he may quit in the wake of strong observations by the Supreme Court last week when the 2G spectrum case came up.

However,Chidambaram today refused to make any comments on Thomas and sought to downplay the meeting between the two.

Story continues below this ad

“What is a detailed meeting? A number of people meet me,” he said when reporters asked him about Thomas meeting him yesterday.

“I made no no suggestion. I received no offer,” was his reply when asked whether the CVC had made any offer to quit.

On Tuesday too,an apex court Bench comprising justices G S Singhvi and Ashok Kumar Ganguly raised questions on Thomas’ ability to supervise the CBI investigations in the 2G case. It would be difficult for Thomas to objectively monitor the investigations.

“CBI is functioning under the CVC. At that time he (Thomas) was functioning as Telecom Secretary. It would be difficult for him to objectively monitor.”

Story continues below this ad

“He had justified the action which are being subject to scrutiny by this court and CBI. It would be difficult for him to objectively supervise.” the bench observed.

The Indian Express’ had reported the government wants him to resign on his own to save it further embarrassment.

the main Opposition,BJP,raising the decibel on Tuesday demanding Thomas be sacked.

The BJP said he should not be provided with an “escape route” by allowing him to resign in the wake of observations made by the Supreme Court against him.

Story continues below this ad

“He should be sacked. He should not be given an escape route by allowing him to resign,” BJP Deputy Leader in the Rajya Sabha S S Ahluwalia told reporters.

“Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj had given her dissent note but the Prime Minister and the Home Minister insisted on appointing him… he is named in the chargesheet as an accused in a 10-year-old case in Kerala,” he said.

He claimed that while the government had claimed that Thomas was not an accused,an RTI reply revealed that his name is still in the chargesheet.

The Supreme Court had last week raised questions about Thomas’ controversial appointment as CVC despite his name figuring as an ‘accused’ in a criminal case. His name figures in the chargesheet filed in a palmoleine export case.

Story continues below this ad

‘The Indian Express’ reported on Tuesday that CVC P J Thomas,the former Secretary of the Department of Telecommunications,is likely to be the next casualty of the 2G spectrum scandal.

Thomas was appointed CVC this September after spending a year in the DoT. Thomas’s role at the DoT came under heavy criticism for a variety of reasons.

One,he did not take any action against officials who allowed 85 firms to get licences even though they did not qualify (this was exposed by the CAG). Two,Thomas did not levy penalties on firms who did not fulfil their rollout obligations,or recommend that their licences be cancelled — the CAG had to do this.

Thomas also wrote to the CAG saying it had no locus standi when it came to examining what he called “policy issues” — that is,issuing of the licences at bargain-basement prices.

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement

You May Like

Advertisement