BJP leaders in Madhya Pradesh slammed former CM Digvijaya Singh on Saturday over alleged illegal appointments made during his tenure. The move came after the Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed the appointment of a Class III employee who reportedly got the job after Singh issued a note sheet to relax rules. State BJP chief Nandkumar Chouhan told reporters that 16 people were appointed on the basis of note sheets issued by then CM Singh. He also shared copies of the note sheets purportedly signed by Singh. “He treated the state as his fiefdom and distributed largesse like in feudal times,’’ claimed Chouhan, adding that based on the court order, an FIR could be registered against Singh. Cabinet minister Narottam Mishra said Congress was demanding the resignation of CM Shivraj Singh Chouhan in connection with Vyapam scam despite there being no evidence against him and dared Congress chief Sonia Gandhi to act against Singh in the light of the court order. Singh took to Twitter to defend himself. “Before relaxing the rules I got the sanction of the Cabinet. I did not appoint youths by looting them as in the case of Vyapam.whatever decisions were made during my tenure were legal and conformed to government rules,’’ he said. [related-post] The high court Thursday quashed the appointment of Arun Kumar Tiwari, a sub-engineer in the water resources department and known to be close to Singh. The division bench of Chief Justice A M Khanvilkar and Justice K K Trivedi also ordered legal action against Tiwari and those associated with his appointment. Reacting to the order, Singh tweeted, “Shocked to hear the Hon High Court MP order against me without giving me notice or giving me opportunity to plead my case. Is this Justice?’’. Tiwari was first appointed in 1990 on a daily wage basis in Rewa district’s Mauganj Nagar panchayat area. He was made sub-engineer in 1995 and his appointment was soon regularised. Mansukh Lal Saraf, a municipal councillor, had moved the court against the appointment. A single bench of high court had heard the matter and on September 11, 1997, held that the appointment violated rules. Singh allegedly issued a note sheet for Tiwari’s appointment just two weeks after his previous appointment was quashed. Saraf moved the court again in 1999 when Tiwari was appointed despite the previous order. The court had treated the second petition as a PIL in 2002. The court also noted that Tiwari had not made any application and Singh had issued the note sheet on his own. “The argument that the decision. was a collective decision of the cabinet of ministers is of no relevance. The fact that more persons joined hands in perpetrating the illegality or making appointments contrary to the statutory rules cannot validate the action,’’ it said.
