The corruption issue is going to dominate the Budget Session of Parliament, with the main Opposition Congress questioning the “deafening silence” of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Gujarat chief mini
The corruption issue is going to dominate the Budget Session of Parliament, with the main Opposition Congress questioning the “deafening silence” of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Gujarat chief minister Anandiben Patel on the Gujarat land deal row. While the ruling BJP and its chief ministers have already made leaders of the Congress, Trinamul Congress, DMK, NCP, Samajwadi Party and the BSP its main target of attack. the Sonia Gandhi-led party is questioning the role of Mr Modi and Ms Patel on the Gujarat land deal after launching a campaign against BJP CMs Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Raman Singh and Vasundhara Raje on Vyapam, rice and PDS scam and “Lalitgate” in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan, respectively.
Antagonising about half-a-dozen political parties could affect the Budget Session as non-Congress Opposition parties cannot support the government on any issue if the confrontation between the BJP and the rest intensifies.
Meanwhile, assailing Prime Minister Narendra Modi for his “deafening silence” on the Gujarat land deal row, the Congress on Monday sought a clarification from him and demanded that the Supreme Court take suo motu cognisance of the case and order an independent investigation. “Mr Prime Minister, if this is not corruption, would you care to explain to the country what is corruption It is a fit case for a court-monitored investigation,” Congress spokesman Manish Tewari told reporters here. The Supreme Court should take suo motu cognisance of the case and order an independent investigation, he said.
Claiming that certain “new facts” have emerged with regard to the issue, Mr Tewari said there is a a “clear case of impropriety, a clear case of corruption and a definite case of conflict of interest”.
He said the Gujarat government had issued a notification on February 8, 2010 barring commercial activities within a two-km radius of the Gir sanctuary. But in October the same year, “large tracts of land adjoining the sanctuary were given to a private firm for a pittance”, he claimed.
Later, the ownership of the company changed and the state government came out with a notification, bringing down the restricted area from two-km to one-km around the sanctuary.
“The question which arises is who is this customisation of policy benefiting Who will benefit from flagrant violation of environment law and wildlife protection law ” Mr Tewari asked.
The party will raise the issue in and outside Parliament, he said.
