Comments
The Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, Mr Murli Manohar Joshi, has rejected demands for extending the term of the Committee beyond April 30.
In a letter to the members of the Committee, Mr Joshi said that the Committee was appointed for a period of one year and the newly elected Members will take charge on May 1. The PAC is currently examining the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General on allocating 2G licences in 2008.
Some members of the PAC had demanded that the term of the Committee be extended since the issue was complex.
According to sources, Mr Joshi has also rejected suggestions of extending the probe to various policy decisions taken from 2003 onwards.
In the letter to the PAC members, Mr Joshi said that since the PAC was concerned with only the recent developments, the necessity of covering the entire period from 2003 did not arise.
Mr Joshi added in the letter that the witnesses examined by the PAC were related to events from 2007 to the present, sources said.
Some members of the PAC had said that since the CAG report looked into revenue losses to the Government as a result of telecom policies from 2003 onwards, the Committee should also examine the issues from that year onwards.
On the issue of whether PAC should stop its investigation into the entire 2G scam since the Joint Parliamentary Committee is already looking into the matter, Dr Joshi said that the matter has been put to rest by the Speaker.
He said that the functions of the PAC cannot be diluted particularly in view of the fact that Parliament was mindful of the PAC's ongoing examination when the motion for constitution of JPC to examine the 2G scam.
Mr Joshi added that the objective of the PAC was not to look into policy issues but more in terms of losses to the exchequer. He has taken a view that there was no need to call former Telecom Minister, Mr A. Raja, for deposing before the PAC.
Mr Joshi said the PAC was anyway not looking into the criminality of individuals.
There were also suggestions that the JPC should not examine the issue since the entire 2G scam was sub-judice under the Supreme Court.
Mr Joshi has rejected this view also on grounds that rules do not bar the Committee from examining matters that are sub-judice .
In the letter, he quoted various instances wherein the PAC had earlier examined despite the issue being sub-judice .
Comments
COMMENT NOW
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.