Follow by Email

Total Pageviews


Monday, March 19, 2012








All India General Secretary (Ideology) Janata party

The present Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram who was earlier the Union Finance Minister is a wholly committed and reliable collection agent of the ultra-corrupt, gigantic international fraud Firangi Memsahib Sonia Gandhi, now the 4th richest politician in the world on account of the public money looted from India.

Even a cursory perusal of the concerned records relating to the 2G Spectrum Fraud available in the public domain clearly shows that the then Union Finance Minister (FM) P. Chidambaram and the then Union Telecom Minister A. Raja plotted and conspired together to enrich the Firangi Memsahib Sonia Gandhi and themselves in the process, at a massive cost to the Nation. They completed this job successfully in the months of March-April 2008.

Among the records available in the public domain, I find the following two Notes, one signed by Govind Mohan, Director in the Ministry of Economic Affairs (MEA) on 10th April 2008 and another Note signed by the then FM P. Chidambaram on 16th April 2008 and by D Subbarao the then Finance Secretary on 16th April 2008. D. Subbarao has been rewarded for his loyalty in the successful completion of the Sonia-directed and Chidambaram-executed 2G Spectrum Fraud by his appointment as the Governor of the Reserve Bank of India.

I am presenting below the copy of the Note sent by Director Govind Mohan to the Union FM P. Chidambaram on 10th April 2008 and the Note signed by P. Chidambaram and D. Subbarao on 16th April 2008.


File No. 3/11/2003-INFRA                             SECRET/CONFIDENTIAL


Subject: Comments issued by Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) on Drafts Note
           for CCEA, of Department of Telecommunications (DoT) on “Financial 

          approval of Rs. 1,077.16 Cr for laying of alternate communication network 
          for Indian Air Force for release of Spectrum”.

Finance Minister had directed the undersigned to submit a Note explaining the circumstances under which the Office Memorandum dated April 08, 2008 has been issued by DEA on the above subject. The chronological sequence of events is recounted as under: 

January 29, 2008
Draft Note received from DoT on the subject mentioned above in Department of Expenditure:
The limited issue is release of Rs. 1,078 Crore for laying of alternate Communication network for IAF, as additional budgetary support within 2007-08.  The note is transferred to Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) since spectrum related issues are involved – exact date of transfer not available on DEA files.
March 01, 2008
The Note is flagged as Urgent pending matter to be disposed off expeditiously before the undersigned after his joining as Director Infrastructure Division of DEA.
March 7, 2008
Comments submitted for consideration on the Draft Note on File No. 3/11/2003-INFRA.
March 11, 2008
Finance Minister approves suggestion of Finance Secretary to use the Note for CCEA as an opportunity to raise basic issues of pricing of spectrum for the entire range of spectrum under commercial use (photocopy of Notes at Annexure I/p3)
March 12, 2008
Finance Secretary places in file a Note prepared in DEA on telecom fees and charges for spectrum pricing to be used for formulating comments on the issues involved (Photocopy of Notes Annexure II, pp 4-11)
March 31 2008
The Notes placed in file by Finance Secretary, as also various recommendations of TRAI in this regard used to prepare comments and a Draft OM placed on file for approval of higher authorities (Photocopy of proposed comments at Annexure III, pp 12-15)
April 03, 2008
AS (FA) modifies the Draft OM submitted. Modified version of the OM at Annexure IV, pp 16-19.
April 07, 2008
The matter is discussed further with Finance Minister by Finance Secretary on the basis of a Note prepared by him. (Photocopy at Annexure V, pp 20-21), Vide his marginal notings, FM agrees to the following:
1. Scarcity factor must be taken into account in fixing spectrum usage charges
2. On pricing of spectrum, decision now, details later.
April 7, 2008
Finance Secretary approves a Draft OM for issuance based on discussions with FM, duly recorded on file (photocopy file notings in this regard at Annexure VI p 22; OM approved for issuance at Annexure-VII, pp 23-25) 
April 8, 2007
The earlier Draft OM, which was saved on the undersigned’s computer is inadvertently printed and signed by mistake. Hence, OM at Anenxure III is issued instead of the one actually supposed to have been issued at Annexure-VII.
April 09, 2008
The error in issuing the wrong OM is detected after media reports attribute certain stipulations on spectrum pricing to Ministry of Finance, which, however, are not there in the final approved OM.  Accordingly, the undersigned delivers the correct OM personally to Wireless Advisor, DoT whose reception on behalf of Secretary, DoT may be seen on Annexure VII at the bottom. As informed by Advisor (Wireless) the incorrect version of OM received was not processed in the DoT file. JS (Infra), DEA speaks personally to Secretary, DoT asking for withdrawal of the earlier OM and the request is acceded to by Secretary, DoT.

2.0    The OM finally issued is based on the discussions held by FS with FM, the gist of which is recorded and placed at Annexure V.

3.0    In as far as the issuance of the wrong OM, in the first instance is concerned, the mistake, though inadvertent, is purely assignable to a lapse on the part of the undersigned. For this lapse, the undersigned is agreeable to bear the consequences of any action - disciplinary or otherwise – which the Department may contemplate against him.

4.0    This Note, which has been seen by JS (Infra) and AS (EA), is being submitted as per FM’s directions through HCI, London; Finance Secretary is on tour.

April 10, 2008


Finance Minister (Camp: London)
Through: Minister, Economic, HCI, London
(Total: 25 pages)

    I accept that the lapse in sending the wrong OM was inadvertent. However, drafting or issuing OMs on draft Note for Cabinet/CCEA etc. should be done with greater care. For Instance, the wrong OM dated 8.4.2008 is captioned “Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure”. The modified draft OM at annexure-IV is also captioned, “Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure” and is addressed to Ministry of Power (Sh. S. Behuria, Secretary), Sanchar Bhawan, New Delhi. The final OM, which is the correct version, sent on 8.4.2008 (Annexure-VII) is also captioned “Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure”.

2.    These errors could have been easily avoided.

3.    That apart, the draft note received from DoT was indeed considered by me on 11.03.2008. Thereafter, that file containing the draft note from DoT and the proposed OM was not put up to me. What was considered was only a non-paper given to me by the Minister of Telecommunications on which I had been informed by FS that DEA would send a non-paper containing our views. It is in this context that the note for discussion was prepared; a discussion took place; and I had indicated my views on the margin of that note. Logically, this should have been followed by sending a non-paper to the DoT. However, if there was an intention to send a formal OM containing our views on the draft note for cabinet received from DoT, that file should have been put up to me and my signature obtained. I may note that I was in office on 8.4.2008 and 9.4.2008.

4.    Such errors should be avoided in future.

(P. Chidambaram)

Finance Minister

(D. Subbarao)
Finance Secretary

My investigative analysis of the above two Notes brings out the following brutal facts:

1. In Para 3.0 of the Note of Govind Mohan Dt 10th April 2008, he has taken full responsibility for the lapse of issuing the wrong Office Memorandum (OM) on 8th April 2008. The vital point to be noted in Govind Mohan’s Note is that there is no reference to any ‘non-paper’.

2. In Para 3 of the Note of P. Chidambaram and Finance Secretary D. Subbarao Dt 16th April 2008, we find a sudden emergence, nay, birth of a fraudulent and illegitimate baby named as non-paper by its parents D. Subbarao and P. Chidambaram. Let me quote the words of P. Chidambaram from this Para 3:

“What was considered was only a non-paper given to me by the Minister of Telecommunications on which I had been informed by FS that DEA would send a non-paper containing our views.”

In the Central Secretariat Manual, THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR THE FILING OF ANY ‘non-paper’. This shady post-facto invention was done by P. Chidambaram and D. Subbarao to hide their slimy tracks and treacherous trails. No action was taken against Govind Mohan because the entire Union Finance Ministry was against the combined fraudulent operations of P. Chidambaram and Union Telecom Minister A. Raja.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.