Kaleshwaram probe: Ghose Commission summons KCR, ex-ministers
The Commission has also issued notices to former Minister T. Harish Rao and BJP MP Eatala Rajender.
While K. Chandrasekhar Rao (KCR) has been asked to appear on June 5, BRS leader Harish Rao has been summoned on June 6. Rajender has been directed to appear before the Commission on June 9.
During KCR's first term as the chief minister between 2014 and 2018, Harish Rao was the irrigation minister while Rajender held the finance portfolio. During KCR's second term from 2018 to 2023, Harish Rao was the finance minister, while the irrigation portfolio was with KCR.
The Commission, headed by retired Supreme Court judge Pinaki Chandra Ghose, is probing the alleged irregularities in planning, design, construction, quality control, operation and maintenance of Medigadda, Annaram and Sundilla Barrages of the Kaleshwaram project.
The one-man Commission was constituted in March 2024, a few months after some piers of the Medigadda Barrage caved in.
The term of the Commission has been extended repeatedly for seven times so far after its initial term ended on June 30, 2024.
Notices to KCR, Harish Rao and Rajender were issued a day after the state government extended the Commission's term for two more months, till July 31, to enable it to complete the examination of all those involved.
The Commission has so far examined over 100 engineers, retired and serving officials associated with the barrages and others.
Most of the engineers who were examined by the Commission either admitted to lapses in the procedures or expressed ignorance about decision-making.
The Commission examined various documents, including the final report of the National Dam Safety Authority, the Vigilance report and other files.
The panel was expected to submit its report to the government on May 21 or 22. However, the Commission decided to examine KCR, Harish Rao and Rajender as most of the engineers and officials who deposed before it stated that the decisions were taken in the presence of the then chief minister and that they acted on the chief minister's and ministers' orders.
Meanwhile, reacting to the notices, BRS leader Krishank Manne alleged that a notice was issued to KCR to disturb BRS NRI celebrations scheduled to be held in the United States on June 1.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
Expanded list of docs to prove citizenship voter-friendly: SC
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday orally remarked that the Election Commission's decision to expand the list of acceptable documents for establishing a voter's identity in the Bihar Special Intensive Revision (SIR) was "actually voter-friendly." A division bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi orally remarked that the expansion of documents leads to "expansion of choice" giving the voters "more options". Finance Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 4 By CA Himanshu Jain View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program Finance Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 3 By CA Himanshu Jain View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals By Vaibhav Sisinity View Program Finance Value and Valuation Masterclass - Batch 2 By CA Himanshu Jain View Program Finance Value and Valuation Masterclass Batch-1 By CA Himanshu Jain View Program Speaking for the bench, Justice Bagchi told one of the counsels for the petitioners that "we can understand your argument on exclusion of Aadhaar card but increasing the number of (acceptable) documents gives the voters more options". The Bench said this in light of contention raised by the petitioners that in the past the list of documents under a revision of rolls was not more than seven as compared to eleven in Bihar's SIR. Weighing in, Justice Kant orally remarked "things would have been different if you (voter) had to submit all the eleven documents. Then it would have been against the voters. But (in the instant case) ECI has given eleven options". The Bench also questioned the contention raised by another counsel for the petitioners that ECI did not have the power to conduct the special intensive revision (SIR). Live Events The Bench referred to Section 21(3) of the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1950, which says "the Election Commission may at any time, for reasons to be recorded, direct a special revision of the electoral roll for any constituency or part of a constituency in such manner as it may think fit." Justice Bagchi added that the residuary power of the Election Commission flows from Article 324 of the Constitution as well. The Representation of the Peoples Act mentions both summary revision and special revision and the Commission has only added the word "intensive". Advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that the Election Commission should publish the list of the 65 lakh voters who were omitted from the list and also the reasons for the omission. Bhushan urged the Bench to issue an interim direction to the Commission to publish the names of persons excluded from the draft, to make the draft list on the website searchable, give names of persons recommended/not recommended by the BLO, and the reasons for deletion. The case will come up for resumed hearing on Thursday when the Election Commission will present its counter. At the last hearing, on Tuesday, the Bench had verbally remarked that "largely it appears to be a case of trust deficiency". The Bench had also told the counsels for petitioners that they should "agree" with the claim of Election Commission that a "detailed inquiry is not required" for the purpose of preparing draft rolls. The Bench had questioned the petitioners if it was their argument that Aadhar card is a proof of citizenship. "Do we presume that it is your argument that Aadhar is proof of citizenship?", the Bench had questioned one of the counsels for the petitioners. Referring to the Aadhar act, the Bench had said that the Election Commission of India was right in submitting that an Aadhaar card is not a conclusive proof of citizenship. The argument by petitioners that electors in Bihar do not have a majority of documents sought by the ECI as proof did not find favour with the Bench. "Largely, it appears to be a case of trust is an integral part of India. If people in Bihar do not have (the documents) then people in other states won't also have", Justice Kant had orally observed on Tuesday.
News18
10 hours ago
- News18
KTR challenges DyCM Bhatti Vikramarka on implementation of six guarantees
Hyderabad (Telangana) [India], August 13 (ANI): Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) Working President KT Rama Rao has come down heavily on Deputy Chief Minister Bhatti Vikramarka for his recent statement claiming that the Congress government had implemented 'almost all" of the six guarantees promised to the to a press note, KTR recalled that, before the elections, the Congress party and its leaders, including Bhatti Vikramarka, had urged people to 'keep the Six Guarantee cards safe" and assured that every promise would be fulfilled within 100 days of coming to power.'Now, it's not just 100 days but two years since you took office, and not a single guarantee has been fully implemented. Yet you claim to have fulfilled almost all, this is nothing but deceiving the people," KTR said, as per the the Congress government's propaganda regarding the six guarantees and the 420 promises made, KTR said the people of Telangana have seen through the lies. 'That is why, across villages, the public is chasing away Congress leaders," he a direct challenge, KTR dared Bhatti Vikramarka and any minister in his cabinet to visit any village in Telangana and tell the people that all the promises, including the guarantees, have been implemented.'If you have the courage, go and say it. If the villagers don't drive you out after hearing that, I will quit politics permanently," KTR declared, according to the BRS leader further asserted that the falsehoods and propaganda of the Congress on implementing the six guarantees will be met with a fitting reply from the people in every village of September 2023, during the Telangana Assembly elections, the Congress announced six poll guarantees for the people of the party promised to include houses for all the homeless, Rs 4,000 old age pension, Rs 2,500 monthly assistance for all women, gas cylinders for Rs 500, free bus travel for women and Rs 10 lakh health insurance, besides several other first Guarantee 'Indiramma Indlu" promises a House site plus Rs 5 lakh and a 250 sq yards plot for Telangana movement second Guarantee was 'Mahalakshmi" Rs 2500 monthly allowance to all women, a Gas cylinder at Rs 500 and free travel in all TSRTC buses across the third Guarantee was Gruha Jyoti – 200 units of free Guarantee was for the elderly: Cheyutha – Rs. 4000 pension, Rs 10 lakh Rajiv Arogyasri party also promised a Rs 4000 monthly pension for the elderly and Rs 10 lakh health insurance under the Rajiv ArogyaShri Guarantee was Rythu Bharosa: Rs 15,000 annually to all farmers and tenant farmers, along with Rs 12,000 for agri labour and Rs 500 bonus for paddy sixth Guarantee was for youth, i.e. Yuva Vikasam – Vidya Bharosa card worth Rs 5 lakh for students – Telangana International Schools in every mandal. (ANI)
The Wire
16 hours ago
- The Wire
ECI Response to Rahul Gandhi 'Inadvisable', Should Order 'Immediate Inquiry': Former CEC
Karan Thapar O.P. Rawat pointed out that in citing Rule 20 (3) (b) of the Registration of Electors Rules of 1960 to demand an affidavit on oath from Gandhi, the Election Commission was converting something that was discretionary and optional into a mandatory requirement. Om Prakash Rawat, who served as the 22nd Chief Election Commissioner of India in 2018, has said that the Election Commission's response to Rahul Gandhi's disturbing allegations about fraudulent voters in Mahadevapura is 'inadvisable' and 'unfortunate'. Instead, he said, the Election Commission should 'immediately inquire and investigate' into the allegations levelled by Gandhi. In a 30-minute interview to Karan Thapar for The Wire, Rawat said the Election Commission has not followed its own conventional practice and has instead opted to 'reinvent the wheel'. The established practice of the Commission – which Rawat said was followed in an earlier instance of allegations about the electoral register in Hyderabad when he was Chief Election Commissioner – is to immediately order a full-fledged inquiry and investigation and not require an affidavit on oath. Equally importantly, Rawat pointed out that in citing Rule 20 (3) (b) of the Registration of Electors Rules of 1960 to demand an affidavit on oath from Gandhi, the Election Commission was converting something that was discretionary and optional into a mandatory requirement. More importantly, Rawat argued this rule does not apply to the Rahul Gandhi case and, when pressed whether it was therefore being wrongly applied, Rawat chose to maintain silence and instead smiled. When it was pointed out to him that the audience would take his silence as an affirmative answer he continued to smile. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
