IIT-M's derecognition of APSC

I found it difficult to take a view on the recent happenings in IIT-Madras till I came across the following report in Times of India:

"Author Arundhati Roy sent an email to APSC - the banned student group, expressing her support. "You have my unhesitating support. You have touched a nerve — what you are saying and seeing ie: that casteism and corporate capitalism go hand in hand is the last thing the authorities and the government want to hear. Because they know that you are right. It is the most dangerous thing for them to hear right now," she wrote. "

It is clear that social saboteurs of different hues are joining hands to create havoc in an institution known for creditable academic performance. 

A report in The Hindu says, "NCSC Chairman P.L. Punia on Sunday said that a notice has been issued to IIT-M and a reply has been sought.

“I have issued a notice to the institute and sought its reply after taking note of the incident myself. We will take action in this regard,” Mr. Punia said, adding, “Youngsters must get freedom of speech on campuses. Imposing bans thus is like suppressing their voices. This is completely wrong.” "

M.L.Punia is an MP in the Rajya Sabha representing the Congress party. If politicians are appointed as chiefs of Commissions, one can expect them to politicise every issue.

Added on 1st June:

Following link is an enabler for a meaningful analysis of the issue under discussion:

http://www.t5eiitm.org/2015/05/dissent-and-derecognition-the-apsc-issue/

Added on 2nd June:

Pratap Bhanu Mehta's views carried in The Indian Express:

http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/higher-abdication/99/

Unmitigated hypocrisy

Following is a tweet of Shashi Tharoor:

"Stimulating discussion w/ @soniafaleiro & @OLIVERBALCH of India mainly through the prism of violence against women "

Imagine Tharoor discussing violence against women! There never has been a more sanctimonious humbug.

Scamnesia

Manmohan Singh has claimed in all humility and in all duplicity that there was no scam and no corruption under his watch. This daredevil mendacity has spawned a neologism: Scamnesia.

A leader is supposed to protect his team's lawful actions and not illegitimate / immoral conduct. Singh facilitated growth of dacoits in his ministry and feels no remorse over his shameful behaviour. He must be brought to justice.

Is Tata Motors' Rights issue right?

Tata Motors Ltd. recently issued rights shares. The issue closed on 2nd of May, 2015. By this time, the company should have had an inkling of its financial performance for the whole year 2014-15 including the 4th quarter. However, the shareholder-applicants were aware of performance upto 31st December, 2014 only.

In the abridged letter of offer, the company mentioned that its sales of vehicles in January, 2015 was 5% more than in 2014 and its sales in February, 2015 was 11% more than in 2014. Thus a shareholder could only have assumed that things were either better in 2014-15 compared to 2013-14 or atleast things were not worse.

Accordingly, the market expectation as reported in the media was that net profit on consolidated basis would be Rs.4150 crore for the 4th quarter. It actually turned out to be Rs.1747 crore only. Standalone EPS for 2014-15 is negative at Rs.14.72. The company says that the adverse results are caused by 1) higher depreciation and amortisation and 2) adverse MTM of unmatured hedges not eligible for hedge accounting. These factors must have been in the knowledge of the company though the shareholders could not have foreseen them in the normal course.

Thus there was definitely asymmetric information available with the company and its shareholders.  In a situation like this, a well-managed trust-worthy company could have stalled the rights issue process and earned more goodwill. Legal implications of this issue are not clear. But, in an ethical sense, this is a stigma on Tata Motors.

Faith in God

The Hindu reports:

"Senior Congress leader and former Union Minister P. Chidambaram has congratulated AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa on becoming Chief Minister for the fifth term.

He, however, took a dig at the series of yagams, padayatras and processions organised by the partymen for the past six months praying her return. “This has lessened my belief in God,’ he said."

Why should this reduce his belief in God? One's faith / belief in God cannot be dependent on what others do or do not do. Chidambaram may think that one should not pray for material success though I do not think that he is so spiritually evolved. He may be of the view that God should not have granted such prayers. Who is he to decide what God must do? Or, he may just be having a dig at what he thinks is superstitious. An agnostic may say that even belief in God is superstitious. Whichever way one analyses Chidambaram's comment, one's confidence in Chidambaram's logic is reduced.

Manmohan Singh's "clean image"

Pradip Baijal, a former Chairman of TRAI,  has made some observations on Manmohan Singh, Dayanidhi Maran and CBI which throw some light on UPA's stand on morality. These are mentioned in Times of India.

"Agency (CBI) forced me to implicate industrialist Ratan Tata and former Cabinet minister Arun Shourie if I wanted to save myself."

" CBI harasses upright civil servants and political opponents of the government in power".

 "They (CBI) would alternately threaten to harm me and my family and then dangle a carrot of sparing me if I implicated Ratan Tata and Arun Shourie,"

"In the 2G case, they (CBI) had told me that there was an open and shut case against me, and an FIR would be filed soon, and I would be arrested. Perhaps the CBI officers were trying to treat their bruised egos at the instance of their old masters. They had warned me in each case that I would be harmed if I did not cooperate."

"This was suspiciously similar to Dayanidhi Maran's threats in 2004. It only dawned on me later that perhaps this was being done either by Dayanidhi Maran and A Raja, acting together or by corporates who were trying to protect their self-interest. Dayanidhi Maran knew exactly what I discussed with the PM. I can only surmise that they were all working in tandem, possibly along with the PM (referring to Manmohan Singh), (P) Chidambaram and Kapil Sibal at different stages, and were guiding the CBI enquiry, getting files removed and, making false statements in the media to make a case against the erstwhile Trai."

" CBI has deteriorated into an instrument of state power, particularly during the terms of the last two directors, A P Singh and Ranjit Sinha."

"In 2004, after a routine meeting, Ratan Tata told me that he was being threatened by Dayanidhi Maran that unless he accepted the merger of Tata Sky with Sun TV, he would ruin him. Ratan Tata refused to cooperate."

"UPA government removed important files from TRAI and telecom ministry to hide its wrongdoings when scandal hit the headlines in 2009-2010."

" Maran told me that he was "Prime Minister, Telecom" and would take all decisions on telecom. "He warned that I would come to severe harm if I did not comply with his instructions. He was proved right, since I did face severe hardships later."

 "...The PM also told me to cooperate with my minister in the coalition government he headed, since non-cooperation could compromise his government". 

 "They (CBI) had warned me in each case (cases related to 2G scam and disinvestments) that I would be harmed if I didn't cooperate. Incidentally, this was exactly what the eminent economist Prime Minister (Manmohan Singh) had told me would happen if I did not cooperate in their scheme of things in the 2G case." 

"Had I agreed to their (Manmohan Singh and Maran) suggestions and not given the report, the 2003 special regime would have continued and UPA would have held NDA or TRAI (including me) responsible for the 2G scam. The PM would not have accepted his responsibility, just as he shirked responsibility in Coalgate scam."

There are many instances where Manmohan Singh compromised with standards of ethical governance. If despite these, there are people who continue to believe in his honesty, it only shows how gullible we are. It is difficult to judge who among Manmohan Singh, Dayanidhi Maran, A.Raja, P.Chidambaram and Kapil Sibal was the worst crook. It is a pity that our criminal justice system has not yet found any of them guilty. One hopes that Modi and his ministers will have a better sense of values.

On Narendra Modi

Very few assessments of Narendra Modi are balanced. There are carping criticisms and enthusiastic encomiums. Even estimates are rare. Therefore, it is refreshing to come across a logical review of Modi in the first year of primeministership by Pratap Bhanu Mehta, President of Centre for Policy Research appearing in The Indian Express. Some of his observations:

"There is ambition, and even a hint of liberality that ambition brings. But there is the temptation to knock down all opponents. It has been hard to take his measure, because the man and his measures have become one. And the man, after one year, still remains elusive."

"Prime Minister Narendra Modi provokes unprecedented passion. Both his supporters and his critics fail to keep a steady grip on his vices and virtues. He is hard to grasp because he is the product of a peculiarly contradictory moment in Indian democracy. He is a centraliser who looms large. A sense of his self is infused in every speech. Some yearned for exactly this kind of leader. But his sense of self-legitimation also draws power from democracy: an architect of his own fortune, who represents, in his own way, a deepening vernacularisation of democracy. He is seeking legitimacy in the eyes of the people: the compulsive desire to project an image is in service of this goal. But it also means that he will don different costumes, languages and even headgear when necessary. The script will evolve as he reads the people."

"Modi is, in a strange way, a leader who seems to wants to fold in all the qualities of those he claims to represent. This is, by its very nature, a quixotic enterprise, full of tensions. It is often asked: Who is the real Modi? The one articulating lofty and generous aspirations or the one whose government can have streaks of paranoia and petulance?"

" But institutions that supposedly protect individuals: justice systems, police, bureaucracy, the CBI, the CVC, the RTI are in disrepair. Many of their pathologies were not the creation of this government. But there is an anxiety that this government could match existing pathologies with a new efficiency, to produce even more detrimental outcomes."

"It is hard to take his measure. All the contradictions of India play out in his persona."