LG asked babus to go to HC against assembly panel, says AAP
NEW DELHI: The Delhi assembly’s petitions committee on Saturday alleged that lieutenant governor Anil Baijal permitted IAS officers to move Delhi High Court against the panel. Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) spokesperson and chairperson of the committee Saurabh Bhardwaj said that instead of initiating an inquiry into “irregularities” in de-silting of drains, the L-G protected officers by “choosing not to” take action against them.
“Chief secretary Anshu Prakash and then PWD secretary Ashwani Kumar, instead of agreeing to investigate serious charges of corruption, chose to challenge the petitions committee report in the high court. We have RTI replies that reveal that the L-G provided permissions to these IAS officers to file cases in the high court against the Delhi Assembly summons,” Bhardwaj said at a press meet on the Delhi Assembly premises on Saturday.
The L-G’S office and bureaucrats did not comment on the issue. The statement of the panel comes a day after the High Court directed chief secretary Prakash and two other officers to appear before the committees of Delhi Legislative Assembly, which had issued notices to them, warning them of contempt if they did not do so.
Last year during June-july, the petitions committee had visited over one hundred drains across Delhi under the three municipal corporations and the PWD. “It was found that most of the reports related to desilting submitted by MCDS and PWD to the Assembly Committee as well as Delhi High Court were fabricated and were far from reality,” Bhardwaj said.
He added that the Assembly committee had recommended vigilance and ACB inquiry into the “deep rooted” corruption. The L-G who headed the ACB and vigilance department did not even care to initiate the inquiry.
Bhardwaj said that the RTI replies have revealed “huge payments” were made to the advocates who defended these IAS officers.
“The L-G office even granted permission to these officers and even paid advocates fee to challenge the report of the petitions committee in the high court. Later, the case was disposed but no action was initiated by the chief secretary and the L-G,” he said.