Vittal faces flak over unilateral decisions

NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 18: Central Vigilance Commissioner N Vittal is facing flak from the Government as well as within Satarkata Bhavan over...

NEW DELHI, FEBRUARY 18: Central Vigilance Commissioner N Vittal is facing flak from the Government as well as within Satarkata Bhavan over his decision to refer to the CBI 8220;allegations8221; of income-tax violations by senior political leaders, including some Union ministers, named in the Jain hawala case. According to sources, Vittal sent the reference to CBI Director R K Raghavan last week, based on 8220;source information8221;, and consulted his colleague, V S Mathur, after the deed.

CVC sources say Vittal sent the relevant file to Mathur only today, calling 8220;for discussions8221; in the matter. They point out that there is no scope for discussion among the CVCs 8212; mandatory under the provisions of the CVC Act before a decision is taken 8212; after the decision.

Earlier, Mathur had intervened and forced Vittal to modify his controversial order on putting the names of officials facing chargesheets on the CVC8217;s website.

When contacted by The Indian Express, Mathur, who recently suffered a bereavement, refused to comment on his differences with Vittal.

The 8220;source information8221; cited by Vittal in his reference to the CBI might well be a letter from Vineet Narain, a petitioner in the Jain hawala case, which was sent nearly 18 months ago. But Vittal told TV channels on Wednesday that the information had come from the I-T authorities. I-T sources have denied this.

In his letter to Vittal sent in September 1998, Narain had sent a 8220;list of 22 coded names mentioned in the Jain diaries8221; and asked Vittal to get the CBI and Enforcement Directorate to take a 8220;fresh look8221; at the case. Narain subsequently had a meeting with Vittal in his office.

Under the provisions of the CVC Act, as envisaged by the Supreme Court, all the vigilance commissioners are of equal rank and all decisions have to be taken in consultation. Around two months ago, Mathur had written to Vittal citing the Act and pointing out that 8220;you are a central vigilance commissioner not chief vigilance commissioner8221; as Vittal was not consulting him on administrative matters.

Story continues below this ad

Now Mathur is likely to raise the issue of lack of consultation with Vittal and will also point out that after the accused have been acquitted in court and the case dismissed, it is unlikely to be looked at afresh on the basis of 8220;unverified source information8221;.

References from Vittal, in fact, are learnt to have begun piling up at the CBI headquarters, and at least till now, no reply has been forthcoming on the two hawala missives sent by him.

Following last month8217;s reference to the CBI to 8220;examine the possibilities8221; of re-opening the Jain hawala case after the arrest of Amir Bhai, Vittal last week forwarded a list of 15 names of politicians with figures of alleged concealed income, saying that the information was based on 8220;source8221; information.

Sources in the CBI say they have been receiving at least two or three such references from Vittal every day and that they were consulting their legal cell before replying to Vittal on the hawala case references.