The government, faced with rising corruption charges, is now examining the possibility of dropping controversial ministers, including Union textiles minister Dayanidhi Maran, in the next Cabinet reshuffle. Pressure is mounting on both the Congress high command and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to “drop ministers being accused of corruption”.
The Maran camp, however, claimed the minister was “in no mood to put in his papers and is relaxed”. He also plans to attend the regular Cabinet meeting on Thursday, sources said. Mr Maran, who has denied all the accusations, said in a statement issued on Wednesday evening that he had “not favoured any company”.
The DMK minister suffered another blow on Wednesday with an NGO moving the Supreme Court against him. The NGO, Centre for Public Interest Litigation (CPIL), sought permission from the court to place before it documents showing Mr Maran’s alleged role in favouring a foreign company. The CBI has also begun looking at the entire deal, though officially it has not yet started any inquiry against Mr Maran.
A majority of Congress leaders are in favour of Mr Maran being dropped from the Union Cabinet. They feel that the government, which faces a slew of corruption charges and a series of anti-corruption protests, “simply cannot afford to retain any controversial ministers in the Cabinet”. They strongly feel that Mr Maran “should be removed before the Monsoon Session of Parliament begins in July as it could be difficult for the government to defend him against Opposition attacks”.
The BJP kept up its onslaught on the government and demanded that Mr Maran resign immediately. “Failing that, the Prime Minister should sack him,” the BJP said.
While Mr Maran is believed to be close to some top Congress leaders, a senior party functionary said he “could be in serious trouble this time”. A section of the Congress wants Mr Maran to “put in his papers on his own, to save the government further embarrassment”.
The anti-Maran faction in the DMK also adopted this line, saying the minister should resign to save both the party and himself from further damage. They also felt that if he failed to resign now, matters might get precipitated and might even lead to his getting “humiliated” like A. Raja.
In Chennai, Tamil Nadu chief minister and AIADMK supremo J. Jayalalithaa said Mr Maran should “quit and face legal proceedings” and demanded that the Prime Minister intervene. “I am quite sure the Prime Minister would know what has to be done and I am sure he would do it. The Prime Minister should ask for Maran’s resignation from the Cabinet. I am sure the Prime Minister will do it, if he has not already done it,” she said.
Mr Maran, meanwhile, strongly refuted allegations that his official decisions as communications minister had indirectly benefited a relative’s company. In a statement issued on Wednesday evening, Mr Maran claimed he had “not favoured any company”.
Denying that he was partial towards any company while awarding telecom licences, Mr Maran said the allegation was “totally untrue and malicious”. Justifying his actions as communications minister in UPA-1, Mr Maran referred to the CAG’s report. “Even the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India has not mentioned any loss to the exchequer on account of issue of licences in my tenure,” he said. On the question of a company having invested in the relative’s network, Mr Maran said: “I was not even a minister ... as I had resigned on May 13, 2007. Needless to say, I own no shares or any fiduciary (interest) in any of these companies.” He also mentioned in his statement that only companies that fulfilled the criteria were granted UASL licences. “The applicant company should also not have a history of default in payment/violation of licence conditions in any service area.”
In the matter of another firm, the minister said the UASL was awarded only after a thorough examination of all issues. His statement notes that the “file was submitted by the department after thorough examination of all issues, including legal aspects, and the company became fully eligible for allotment”.