‘Lack of governance’ worries panel members

Sanjay Jog

Mumbai, April 11: ALTHOUGH there was no unanimity among the members of the Madhav Godbole energy review committee over the institution of a judicial probe on Dabhol project, it was concerned by the numerous infirmities in the process of approval granted to the project and consistent lapse of governance.

“The committee is troubled with the failure of governance that seems to have characterised almost every step of the decision making process on matters relating to DPC.

“This failure of governance has been broad, across different governments at different points of time, at both the state and the Central level, and across different agencies associated with examining the project, and at both the administrative and political levels,” the committee said.

The committee said that it finds hard to accept that such widespread and consistent failure to execute assigned responsibilities is purely coincidental.

The committee chairman Dr Madhav Godbole and one of the members, EAS Sarma, who emphasised the need for a thorough probe under the Commission of Inquiry Act by a sitting or retired judge of the Supreme Court, were of the view that such an inquiry was necessary in order to find satisfactory answers for the questions raised by various sections of people in Maharashtra. The committee has prima facie found infirmities in several decisions taken on Dabhol project at different points of time by the successive governments and agencies in the Centre and the state.

“If this project had been subject to a comprehensive techno-economic appraisal as envisaged under the provisions of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and the related legislation, these infirmities would have been avoided and the design and the scope of the project would have been so adapted as to fully subserve interests and the requirements of the electricity consumers of Maharashtra in particular and the people of the state in general,” the committee remarked. However, the committee said that the fact that this has not been allowed to happen raises questions on whether there has been a concerted effort towards exercise of undue influence on the process of decision making at each and every stage in this project. “There have been clear lapses in governance in the whole affair of DPC and this committee would be failing in its duty if these lapses were not pointed out,” it added.

Dr Godbole and Mr Sarma said that it would be necessary to elicit documentary and other evidence examining those concerned on oath and carry out detailed investigation.

However, they pointed out that any such investigation would have to cover the state government, its agencies, the centre and its agencies and all the others who are concerned with the project. “Such investigation would be necessary for fixing both administrative and political accountabilities.”

Dr Godbole and Mr Sarma said that depending upon the findings of such a judicial commission, if there are lapses established on the part of the government functionaries including the political executives, the responsibility for the same needs to be determined and appropriate action should be taken against them.
“If the judicial inquiry also establishes that there is exercise of undue influence that had resulted in any decision that was against the public interest, the relevant provisions of the contract law may have to be invoked for legally reviewing the existing contractual commitments with DPC and taking all necessary steps that would subserve the public interest, without state government/Maharashtra State Electricity Board having to incur contractual liability,” they said.

However, the other committee members, RK Pachauri, Deepak Parekh and Vinay Mohan Lal were of the view that the term of reference did not provide the committee with any reason to suggest a commission of inquiry. “It is open to the Government of Maharashtra or other authorities to set up a commission of inquiry, should they find any reason to justify the establishment of such a commission,” they observed. These members also expressed their doubts whether such a commission of inquiry would serve any useful purpose, given the need for recording the evidence of a large number of those associated with the decision in MSEB, state and central governments and others, particularly since several of those who were involved have retired and may not be easily available.