Manohar Lal Khattar, CM, Har. had instructed to restrict the scope of the investigation into more than 10,000 Crores Scam:Secretary claim in HC. BJP MLA also wrote letter about corruption to CM, & CID Conducts investigation; but CM Office denies receipt of such letter: Petitioner prays HC to summon records

Manohar Lal Khattar, CM, Har. had instructed to restrict the scope of the investigation into more than 10,000 Crores Scam:Secretary claim in HC. BJP MLA also wrote letter about corruption to CM, & CID Conducts investigation; but CM Office denies receipt of such letter: Petitioner prays HC to summon records.

SEE BELOW THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FILED BY PARDEEP RAPRIA IN HC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

                                     AT CHANDIGARH                                                 

                                                                                   CM - ___________ -2016                                                                                      In CWP No. 6856 of 2016

                                                                       

IN THE MATTER OF:

Raghbir Singh and another                                            .......Petitioners

//VERSUS//

Union of India of India and others                                 .......Respondents

PETITIONERS’ APPLICATION UNDER SECTION – 151 C.P.C. FOR DIRECTIONS TO THE RESPONDENT No.6 and 7.

RESPECTFULLY SHOWTH:           

1.                 That the Petitioners have filed the present petition and the same is pending adjudication before this Hon’ble Court. All the facts relevant to the said petition have been fully set out in the present petition and the Petitioner craves leave to refer and rely on the same as and when necessitated as if the same formed part of this Application and they are not being repeated herein solely for the sake of brevity.

In brief, the Petitioners have filed the present writ petition in order to get investigated the serious offences of the institutionalized form of corruption, money laundering, tax-evasion, forged entries in the banks, and hawala transactions of more than One Lakh Crores having inter-state ramifications, clearly made out from the report/recommendations of the Special Investigation Team (S.I.T.) of the Lokayukta, Haryana. Roughly, 85% of the total revenue comes from the Excise & Taxation Department; which is the source of the State Welfare including construction of roads, Hospitals, Buildings etc.

2.                 That the Sh. Roshanlal, IAS, the  Additional Chief Secretary, Excise & Taxation Department, Govt. of Haryana vide Memo No. PS/ACSET/2014/18 dated 08-12-2014 requested Honourable Lokayukta to restrict the scope of this enquiry to Kaithal district only. However, Shri Srikant Jadhav (IPS) I.G. observed in his report to the Lokayukta that:“in the name of jurisdiction/scope of this enquiry Ld. Additional Chief Secretary, Excise and Taxation, Haryana tried to sabotage the present enquiry....”

However, the Answering Respondent No. 7 filed reply before this Honourable Court to the effect that the letter dated 08.12.2014 was written Sh. Roshan Lal, ACS to Lokayukta for restricting the investigation to only one district, in consultation with the present Chief Minister. It appeared highly improbable that a Constitutional authority like Chief Minister will be a partner in restricting the scope of investigation relating to the corruption and money-laundering. Therefore, with a view to verify the correctness of the aforesaid reply the Petitioner No. 1 had to file two RTI Applications dated 02.06.2016 (Annexure P-57, COLLY) with the offices of the Chief Minister and the answering Respondent , i.e, the Secretary to the Govt. of Haryana, Excise & Taxation Department, seeking below mentioned information:

(1)     ‘Please provide the minutes of the meeting of discussion on 07.12.2014, between the Chief-Minister and  Additional Chief Secretary (Sh. Roshan Lal I.A.S).

(2)     Please provide the complete chain of documents including file notings/note sheets, and correspondence/e-mails between the Chief-Minister and Additional Chief Secretary (Sh. Roshan Lal I.A.S) in reference to the letter dated 08.12.2014 written by the ACS (ET) to the Lokayukta.

(3)     Please provide the copy of the decision taken on the requisite file; for writing the letter dated 08.12.2014 written by the ACS (ET) to the Lokayukta.’

However, despite lapse of the statutory stipulated period under the RTI Act, both offices have failed to provide any information relating to such discussion or meeting, which is a statutory deemed refusal to provide information, in terms of the Section 7(2) of the RTI Act, which reads:
7 (2)“If the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer,as the case may be, fails to give decision on the request for information within the period specified under sub-section (1), the Central Public Information Officer or State Public Information Officer, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have refused the request.” 

Therefore, the refusal to provide aforesaid information creates high doubt about the role of the top-most authorities in sabotaging the huge scam having inter-state ramifications.

3.                 That, Shri Umesh Aggarwal, MLA, Gurgaon Constituency, through a letter (Annexure P-25) to the Chief Minister, Haryana, had expressed his concern over the cover-up of the huge corruption unearthed by the SIT, Lokayukta and also said that the action of the vested interests was clearly marred by conflict of interest, therefore the MLA requested the Chief Minister to take strict action against the guilty officer, as per the recommendations of the Haryana Lokayukta in case/complaint No. 867 of 2011. The Chief Minister Officer instructed the ADGP, CID & Crime to conduct enquiry in the matter. However, when no action appeared to have been taken on the aforesaid letter of MLA; the counsel for the Petitioners, on the instructions of his clients, filed an RTI Application dated 26.12.2015 (ANNEXURE P-34) with the C.M. Office seeking below mentioned information:

(i)         “Certified copy of Final Enquiry Report submitted by SHATRUJIT KAPUR, ADGP, CID & CRIME.

(ii)         Certified copy of the complete file including, file notings, notes, correspondences, minutes of meetings, advices, circulars etc.

(iii)      Certified copy of the report/comments submitted by SHRI SAJJAN SINGH CID & CRIME.

(iv)        Certified copy of the report/comments submitted by SHRI SANDEEP KHIRWAR, IG, CID & CRIME.”

The Chief Minister Secretariat vide letter dated 31.12.2015 (ANNEXURE P-35) forwarded the RTI Application to the PIO-cum-DSP (HQ) CID, Haryana, for providing requisite information. However, the DSP, CID, Crime, vide letter dated 14.01.2016 (ANNEXURE P-41) denied the requisite information on the ground that the investigation in the Enquiry No. 190/FSOICM/2015 was under investigation.

Whereas, the DSP (HQ), CID, Haryana, vide letter dated 23.02.2016 (ANNEXURE P-49) informed the counsel for the Petitioners that ‘after completion of investigation into the ‘Enquiry No. 190/FSOICM/2015, the report had been sent to the Chief Minister, Haryana, by the CID, Haryana, vide its letter no. 78/SPCMFS Dated 18.01.2016.’

However, even after completion of investigation; the Chief-Minister Secretariat, for reasons best known to him as failed to provide the requisite information. Therefore, in view of the fact that as per the aforesaid letter of the DSP (HQ) CID the investigation into the matter was over, vide reminder letter dated 26.02.2016 (ANNEXURE P-51) requested the office of Chief Minister, Haryana to provide the enquiry report; conducted on the letter of Shri Umesh Aggarwal, MLA, Gurgaon. Getting no response, an appeal before the State Information Commission, Haryana, was filed, which was heard on 09.06.2016. Though the Public Information Officer of the C.M. Secretariat was not present, but the DSP, CID (HQ) during the hearing got recorded his statement in the SIC Order dated 09.06.2016 (ANNEXURE P-58) to the effect that
“After completion of the investigation, inquiry report was sent by the Superintendent of Police, CM Flying Squad to the office of the Chief Minister vide letter dated 18.1.2016. The Superintendent of Police, CM Flying Squad informed the answering public authority vide letter dated 23.2.2016 in this regard and the appellant was accordingly informed by the answering respondent SPIO vide letter dated 23.2.2016. The respondent SPIO submitted that the matter was received from the Chief Minister’s office for inquiring into it and inquiry report was submitted in the Chief Minister’s office.” 

Due to the absence of the Public Information Office (PIO) of the CM Secretariat, the State Information Commission had to adjourn the matter for 23.06.2016, though on this date also the PIO though did not appear on the time fixed for hearing and later-on in the evening, in the absence of the Counsel for Petitioners, he got recorded his statement in the order dated 28.06.2016 which read
The SPIO of the office of the Chief Minister submitted that as per record from 1.1.2015 till date the said letter of the MLA was not received in the Chief Minister’s Secretariat.” 

The aforesaid statement of the CM Secretariat baffles the common prudence, as to how the letter of an MLA which was, as per the admission of the DSP, CID, Crime, forwarded by the CM Secretariat to the CID, Crime and the Enquiry No. 190/FSOICM/2015 was registered by the CID Crime and accordingly after completion of investigation the same was sent to the Chief Minister, Haryana, by the CID, Haryana, vide its letter no. 78/SPCMFS Dated 18.01.2016.

In view of the aforesaid submissions of the CM, Secretariat and CID, Crime, Smt. Urvashi Gulati, Information Commission disposed the matter  by passing two orders dated 09.06.2016 (ANNEXURE P-58) and 28.06.2016 (ANNEXURE P-59), without giving any direction to furnish any information relating to the action taken on the letter of the MLA of the present ruling party.

4. That in the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the Petitioners have reasonable belief and apprehension that the CID, Crime, has given crucial findings about the involvement of the top authorities including the top level Ministers of Haryana Govt. and the top Bureaucrats; in the huge scam running into several thousands crores and the vested interests are bent-upon to hide the information, which may be very crucial for effecting disposal of the current CWP.

5.  It is respectfully submitted that it is apparent from the aforesaid description of the documents that the same are very much relevant for the adjudication of the present petition.

PRAYER:

In view of the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstance of the present case, it is respectfully prayed It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:-

(A)Direct the Respondent No. 6 and 7 or other concerned officer to produce the below mentioned documents before this Honourable Court:

(i)     Original Enquiry Report registered as Enquiry No. 190/FSOICM/201 sent to the Chief Minister, Haryana, by the CID, Haryana, vide its letter no. 78/SPCMFS Dated 18.01.2016.

(ii)    Original file containing: (1) Complete original file notings, notes, correspondences related to the Enquiry No. 190/FSOICM/201. (2) Report/comments submitted by SHRI SAJJAN SINGH, S.P., CID & CRIME. (3) Report/comments submitted by SHRI SANDEEP KHIRWAR, IG, CID & CRIME.

(iii)  Minutes of the meeting of discussion on 07.12.2014, between the Chief-Minister and Additional Chief Secretary (Sh. Roshan Lal I.A.S).

(iv)     The complete chain of documents including file notings/note sheets, and correspondence/e-mails between the Chief-Minister and the then Additional Chief Secretary (Sh. Roshan Lal I.A.S) in reference to the letter dated 08.12.2014 written by the ACS (ET) to the Lokayukta.

(v)          The original file wherein the decision for writing the letter dated 08.12.2014 by the ACS (ET) to the Lokayukta was taken

(B)       Pass such other and further order or directions as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

.

Place: Chandigarh                               (PARDEEP KUMAR RAPRIA)

Dated: 11.07.2016                               COUNSEL FOR PETITIONERS