Governments of the world embrace innovation because Innovation is the driver of development but for the governments of India it is nothing but a slogan. My experience of introducing innovative solutions, initially in eradication of ragging & now, in restoring equality & dignity of women is very poor with all governments of India. The much talked about Scheme of Sakhi – One Stop Centres, funded from the Nirbhaya Fund, is on the verge of failure because the Union Government & State Governments have both rejected innovation. (Please read the related article - “Tragic story of Sakhi – OSC”.

General L1 Tender, which is the most common instrument of procurement in governments of India. A tender is cancelled if there is only a single bidder even if the single bidder has the only & the most innovative solution. To qualify for any government tender one must have previous experience. As a result if there is a man or a women who has developed an innovative solution he/she is not even considered regardless of how brilliant or innovative his/her solution might be. Innovation by definition is something that did not exist earlier and what is not available with every bidder. It is unfortunate that young innovative minds are not welcome to work in government schemes or programs.

I know that general L1 Tender is not the only legally permitted instrument of procurement in India but most government officials have extremely poor knowledge of laws on procurement. Most of them think that L1 General Tender is the only instrument of procurement. Expression of Interest (EOI), Request for Proposal (RFP), Two Stage Tender are treated as alternate terms/words for a General L1 Tender. The most unfortunate part is that even if one educates a procurement officer on two different instruments, namely, (i) single source procurement & ( ii) Two Stage Tender that are available to him/her to acquire innovation he still rejects it because he does not have courage to suggest these instruments. Lack of confidence in one self results in lack of courage.

In March 2009 I designed a plan for eradication of ragging which is now known as the National Ragging Prevention Program. In May 2009 the Hon. Supreme court ordered the Union Government to implement the program , in the “same manner” as I had suggested. The “manner” of implementation was the innovation in it. Officials of the Union Government did not have the courage to procure my innovative solution despite an order of the Hon. Supreme Court in my favour. They called for a general L1 Tender. I was not even considered because I did not even qualify for consideration for lack of experience & turnover etc. An agency was selected. The selected agency failed miserably to deliver.

I protested for 3 years with the Prime Minister’s & President’s office, CVC & CAG, Parliamentary committee on higher education & the National Human Rights Commission against the inappropriate selection & the poor quality of work that the chosen agency was doing. I sought support from 35 Members of Parliament, across the party lines, to support my protest. All that I was trying to o was to convince the Government of India to use the innovative solution that I had designed & which was the same that the Hon. Supreme Court had ordered to be implemented. At the end of 3 years when officials of the Government of India agreed to implement the innovation the results , as expected, are brilliant. In the past 4 years ragging has reduced by 75% across the nation.

Hon. Supreme Court in the case of Nagar Nigam, Meerut Vs A1 Faheem Meat Export Pvt. Ltd. has said that where procurement is possible only from a single source or where no reasonable alternative or substitute exists then normal rule of public Tender may be departed from and such contracts may be awarded through ‘private negotiations’. Based on this Judgment the Central Vigilance Commission passed a supporting order on the 5th July, 2007, office order no. 23/07/07. These orders have been incorporated in Rajasthan Transparency & procurement Act of 2012 which allows for procurement from a single source in situations that have been defined by the Hon. Supreme Court in 2006 & by the CVC in 2007.

The Hon. Supreme Court ( 2006) , the CVC ( 2007) & the Rajasthan Act ( 2012) have not used the word ‘Innovative solution’ but they have used the term ‘No reasonable alternative’ or ‘availability from Single source only’. Therefore, it is legal for a procurement agency to procure an ‘Innovative solution’ without any tender on the grounds that there is ‘no reasonable alternative’ or there is only a single source from whom the solution can be procured but officers of governments of India do not have the courage & confidence to say so.

Again we are facing the same problem in our work for restoration of dignity to women in India. Government officials do not mind if the two schemes of Sakhi one stop Centre & Universal Women Help Line fail to deliver. They will hand pick an evaluation agency who will produce a fake/dishonest glorified evaluation report for them. It is business as usual. Please read a related article - “Tragic story of Nirbhaya Fund & Sakhi – One Stop Centre”.

In 2009, in the Conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices, then Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, described the huge arrears and case back logs in our courts as “scourge” of the Indian Legal System. A two day consultation meeting of stakeholders & experts was held in Vigyan Bhawan in 2009 with the objective to create a blue print to reduce the pendency of arrears in courts from 15 years to 3 years by 2012. At the end of the convention a document named - National Mission For Delivery of Justice & Legal Reform was drafted. The mission document was approved by the Union Cabinet for implementation. The mission started working in August 2011. Of course nothing happened. The mission document was shelved and it was business as usual. Four years later, in 2013, the Conference of Chief Ministers and Chief Justices, the same Hon. Prime Minister, Dr. Man Mohan Singh surrendered to the lobby of vested interests. He softened his position and reinforced the misconceived popular belief that nothing could be done about Judicial delays because India is short of Judges. He expressed his helplessness by saying that a ratio of 15.5 Judges per million population was low. At around the same time, Mr. P. Chidambaram, a senior colleague of Dr. Manmohan Singh, responding to a question in the Rajya Sabha, also expressed the Government’s helplessness by saying that low number of Judges / million population was the reason for delays in Judiciary.

Dr. Manmohan Singh & Mr. P Chidambaram are both very intelligent people. While they were in the Government they were also surrounded by intelligent officers and bright analysts. It is hard to believe that none of them knew that the number of Judges/million is not a proper statistic for India. The real statistic for comparison with the West is not the number of Judges per million population but the number of judgments that are written by a Judge in the West compared to the number of Judgments that a judge writes in India. But they chose not to talk about it because it is very convenient to lay the blame on our growing population.

India is not like the West where every person is a potential litigant. A vast majority of population in India that lives below poverty line has nothing to do with Judiciary. The number of Judges per million population in Delhi is double the India’s average rate of 16 judges per million and it is comparable with the West. The infrastructure in Delhi is comparable with the West. But still pendency Delhi District Courts doubled in 6 years from 2004 to 2010.

During the BJP government in the year 2000, Mr. P. Chidambaram wrote an open letter on Judicial Pendency to Mr. Arun Jaitley, who was the Minister of Law & Justice at the time. Mr. Chidambaram called the backlog of pending cases a “ Monumental Shame”. He did not say to Mr. Jaitley that India was short of Judges. He made some valuable suggestions. In response to the open letter Mr. Jaitley did not, express his helplessness by saying that India was short of Judges. He made some constructive suggestions, for instance, tackling of NIA cases, Controlling litigation by the Government, Replacing affidavits for deposition in courts etc. Therefore one can easily conclude that real causes of Pendency are known both to the BJP intellectuals & to the Congress Intellectuals. But neither are interested to tackle the real causes. The BJP Government from 2000 onwards did nothing to tackle Pendency. Ten years of the Congress Government did nothing. And now the present BJP Government is also doing nothing to tackle the problem of delays in Judiciary.

The suggestions made by Mr. Jaitley and Mr. Chidambaram and the Law Commission formed part of the Blue Print for the National Mission. The National Mission Document is an outline of, what needs to be done to reduce pendency. This document was arrived at after extensive consultation between all stake holders, namely, the Government, the Judiciary, the Bar, Experts & the Public. The document says that the mission for Delivery of Justice and Legal Reform would be serviced by a society which will act as a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to define and implement an action plan to realize the vision of the national mission. The document says that the SPV will achieve its objective of reducing the pendency through a multi pronged approach which includes Processes Re-Engineering, Human Resources Development, Institutional Frame Work reforms, Infrastructure Development & Information Technology enablement. The document says that SPV will be run professionally by executives who have management background and extensive specialized experience in managing various forms of an organization. The document says that SPV will have engineers, architects & information technology experts as part of its team. The document says SPV will be supported for research & scientific studies on legal matters by different academic and government bodies such as National Law Schools, the Law Commission, non governmental organizations and private research organizations. The document has 2 full pages that describe the character of the SPV. It is a forward looking entity that is multidisciplinary in its approach and highly research oriented. But during the implementation of the National Mission the idea of SPV was abandoned. Not only was the creation of SPV abandoned but everything that the SPV stood for was also abandoned.

Instead of a Multi Disciplinary & a Confident SPV to lead the reform process the Ministry of Law & Justice settled for a Career Administrative Officer & a number of Rubber Stamp Committees. By no stretch of imagination one can say that a Junior level Career Administrative Officer, who is constantly worried about his Annual Confidential Report, Promotion & Transfer is an adequate replacement for the SPV. A Career Administrative Officer is hardly an autonomous and a flexible entity that can provide Infrastructural, Managerial, Technological & Man Power Services to the Judiciary. That is how the blue print described the SPV – Autonomous & Flexible.

The Union Ministry of Law & Justice says that the decision to abandon SPV, and what it stood for, was taken by the ‘Competent Authority’. This means that this decision was taken either by a bureaucrat or by a politician or jointly by a bureaucrat & a politician. By abandoning the Blue Print the so called ‘Competent Authority’ has betrayed the Trust of the peoples of India who were made to believe that the Government was trying to do all that it can to resolve the issue of delays in Courts. I feel like a fool when I now realize that two days in October 2009 in Vigyan Bhawan was all a drama, a stage managed act to make peoples of India to believe that a genuine effort was being made to resolve the issue of Pendency. It has now become clear that the ‘Competent Authority’ was never interested to improve the pendency. The vested interests want status quo and the ‘Competent Authority’ has ensured that it is business as usual.

It is time for ordinary folks like you and me to question the authority of the ‘Competent Authority’. Can the ‘Competent Authority’ override the collective wisdom & the collective decision made by all stakeholders after extensive consultations which included the Chief Justice of India, the Union Law Minister, the Bar & experts. The decision was also endorsed by the Prime Minister & his Cabinet. We must ask the question if the ‘Competent Authority’ was the final authority then why was this drama staged where deliberations were made, resolutions were passed, and blue prints were printed? We must ask who is the Competent Authority & why the ‘Competent Authority’ has taken upon itself to abandon the idea of SPV & what it stood for. We must ask the Government of the day why the ‘Competent Authority’ should not be charged with negligence because the National Mission is a miserable failure. And why the National Mission should not be re initiated without any interference from the so called – ‘Competent Authority’.

There are several reasons given for delays in our courts. One of them is that we do not have sufficient Judges. In a previous paper I have explained that it is not the shortage of Judges but poor Court/Case management that causes delays in our Courts. Another reason that is often forwarded to justify delays is that we have too many laws, many of them are very old & many are irrelevant. We are also told that we have old & cumbersome procedures that are imbedded in legislation. The advocates of this justification say that the task of “Legislative Rectification” is so huge & enormous that it is unlikely to happen with the present slow pace with which the Parliament works. Therefore there is no possibility that delays in our courts is going to reduce in the near future. I disagree with the pessimism of this view.

I agree we have too many laws. Many are old, old fashioned and outdated. Many overlap & contradict each other. Procedures are, no doubt, imbedded in legislation & many of them are irrelevant because they are based on circumstances that existed in pre independent India. I am not denying that we need legislative intervention to improve the situation but I disagree, very strongly, with the opinion that the problem is so severe and so huge that it can not be managed. I believe a small but sincere effort by Government on select sets of laws and procedures can make a huge difference in pendency.

Let us take the example the Negotiable Instruments Act (NIA). It has spread like a killer weed across the country particularly in metro cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai etc. The following statistics puts the importance of amendment of NIA in perspective. Between 2005 & 2010, in 5 district court complexes of Delhi, 9,60,504 cases , within the Criminal Jurisdiction, were registered under different Acts. Negotiable Instruments Act accounts for 67 % of total cases registered under criminal Jurisdiction. NIA is followed by the Indian Penal Code at 16 %; Criminal Procedure Code at 4 %; Punjab Excise Act of 1914 at 3% ; Indian Arms Act 1959 at 3%; Electricity Act at 1.5%; Motor Vehicle Act at 1.0%; Protection of Women from Domestic Violence ACT at 0.7% ; Companies Act at 0.6% and Delhi Police Act at 0.5%. It is also of interest to know that NIA did not only comprise 67 % of Criminal cases but it also comprised 50% of all cases (Criminal & Civil) that were registered in Delhi between 2005 & 2010. Therefore, instead of worrying about tackling hundreds of Acts if the Government would only tackle Negotiable Instruments Act one would improve the situation dramatically.

What it means to ordinary peoples of India is that a victim of real crime like a murder, rape, an assault, a theft or a fraud etc. has to stay in a queue for relief from courts where 2 out of every 4 people in front of him are not victims of any crime but their cheques have bounced. Our courts have turned into a debt collection agency. The combination of Police & Ld. Magistrates, powered with the power of NIA, is a very powerful debt collection agency. It is a money making machine – at least for the lawyers & the police. Why on earth would any body want to change this cosy arrangement?

On further examination one can see that the majority of petitioners of NIA are banks whose scrupulous agents have forwarded loans to poor people who are in desperate need of money & forced them to sign post dated cheques. It is these dishonored post dated cheques that have swamped the Courts. In other words the, so called, culprits after whom the Police & the Courts are going after are themselves victims of banks & their agents. They should be helped by the State. But instead of that they are being chased by the State for the benefit of banks who are the real criminals. It has all gone wrong. India must be the only state in the world where State is working as a debt collection agency for banks who harass & threaten its citizens.

The Negotiable Instruments Act was first passed in 1881. A working group in mid 1980’s concluded that provisions in the Act of 1881 were deficient and the punishment provided in the Act was inadequate. As a result the first amendment came in 1988 when bouncing a cheque became a criminal offence & the procedure of dealing with a bounced cheque is the same as that of theft. Soon after bringing NIA in the criminal Jurisdiction it was observed that a large number of cases were pending under the act in various courts in the country. It was observed that the prescribed procedure to deal with matters of NIA was cumbersome. Courts were unable to dispose of cases of NIA expeditiously & in a time bound manner. The second amendment was made in the year 2002.

Regrettably, the amendment made in the year 2002 has failed to address problem of delays. The number of cases pending in Courts under the Negotiable Instruments Act are growing at an alarming rate. The reason for delay is that before the trial starts every person whose name is mentioned in the petition has to appear before a Judge in person and get a bail. Only then the trial can start.

Scrupulous Lawyers use this procedure to harass people. For instance, if I am the Managing Director of a company and the cheque that I wrote from my company account is in the name of Mr. X and it bounces then the lawyer of Mr. X will lodge a petition against my company, myself and many other directors, share holders etc. including old people & women of the house hold. For each of these people summons will be issued and they will have to appear in person in the court. The police get involved in executing the summons and warrants. Bails have to be organized & granted. It takes years before one can get all the accused to appear before the Judge and only then the trial starts. This procedure is used as a pressure tactics. Names of older people and women of the house hold are made respondents in the complaint. Summons are issued against them. They have to appear personally and get bail etc. Police are bribed to stop harassing the older and the women etc. It is ridiculous to treat a bounced cheque as a crime that is so serious that one must invoke the same procedure as one invokes in the case of theft or a rape.

Both Congress & the BJP Governments agree that the Negotiable Instruments Act must be amended. This was one of the suggestions made by Mr. Arun Jaitley, fifteen years ago, when he was the Union Law Minister, in response to an open letter from Mr. Chidambaram where Mr. Chidambaram called Pendency in Indian Courts a Monumental Shame. But neither the Congress Government did any thing for the ten years while they were in Government & neither is the BJP Government doing any thing about it now. In response to my petition in the Rajya Sabha the Government said that an Inter Ministerial Group was set up to look into this matter and the Group has suggested several procedural & legislative measures. Several years ago the Government said the same thing that an Inter Ministerial Group was looking into this matter. In short the Government is doing nothing about it.

This article would be incomplete without the mention of the recent ordinance for amendment of the NIA. Recently the Supreme Court of India passed a controversial Judgment on the Jurisdiction of the Court where a complaint regarding a bounced cheque must be presented. I do not wish to discuss the details of that Judgment or argue whether the Judgment was good or bad. Because that is irrelevant to the point that I wish to make.

As soon as the Judgment was passed there was a lot of discomfort within the community of NIA users which comprises Banks, Corporations, Big Businesses etc. Within days of the Judgment an amendment to the NIA was drafted. The amendment could not pass through the Parliament because of disruptions. The amendment was immediately converted into an ordinance & passed as an ordinance. The point to note is that the Government did not appoint an Inter Ministerial Committee to make this amendment because the people affected by this amendment are powerful & wealthy people of India. The people who have been begging the Government for the past 15 years to amend NIA to reduce queues in front of court rooms are non-influential victims of crime. For them there is no hurry. It is of interest to note that in Delhi cases of Domestic Violence, who have to beg for Judicial time, are only 1 % compared to 67 % of NIA. The Government with the Ordinance has demonstrated that it only listens to the powerful & the influential. Victims of real crime can wait.

Comparison with the west on number of Judges per million of population is inappropriate because for a vast majority of our population Judiciary is inaccessible and for 50% that live in poverty Judiciary has no meaning. Litigation, in India is a social taboo & a curse. Friends & relations come to express their sympathy when they find out that one has approached a court of law for seeking justice. And still we blame our growing population for our dysfunctional Judiciary.

UK has roughly 1800 Judges (My source is Internet – therefore not confirmed) and Delhi has 360 Judges (In 2010) excluding judges in the High Court. Therefore, the number of Judges per million population between the UK & Delhi are comparable. It is roughly 30 Judges per million of population. The infrastructure in Delhi is comparable with the UK. In the UK entire population is a potential litigant compared to a fraction in Delhi. But still Delhi has a huge problem of delays. At the end of 2010 Fourteen Lakh cases were active in 5 district courts of Delhi. It is double the number that were active 6 years earlier in 2004. I do not know the present situation but I am sure that nothing has improved. The situation must have only deteriorated since 2010.

It is silly to think that we can keep on increasing judges for ever. At the current disposal rate it will take 5000 Judges for a year to clear the back log of Delhi District Courts and 1200 Judges per year to maintain it. These figures, of course, are questionable for accuracy & the methodology used but these figures, convey a clear message that solution to the problem of delays can not emerge from increasing the number of Judges. The solution lies in minimizing wastage of a Judge’s valuable time. It lies in increasing the efficiency of the system.

The Court Management System in India goes back to our days of Independence when we had a population of 350 millions, all of them starving & none of them potential litigants. Only those Indians used to go to court who were summoned by the Imperial Judge. Judges had plenty of time and most probably they did not trust their court clerks any way. The procedures that were sufficient those days are not sufficient or applicable these days. The Management of Courts & the Management of Cases must be improved with immediate effect. There were no computers during those days.

The cause of delay is not shortage of Judges but poor time management of Judges. Considerable amount of Judicial time is wasted in calling out cases to find out whether notices are served, whether defects are cured, whether affidavits, reply or rejoinder affidavits are filed, etc. This kind of work is not done by Judges in the West. It should not be done by Judges in India too.

Instead of comparing the number of Judges per million population the Government of India should make a comparison of number of cases handled by a Judge in the west compared to India and/or on number of Judgments written by a Judge in the west compared to India. These data are not available to me but I have no doubt that India will score very poorly on this criteria.

A Judge and a Surgeon are alike. In a good hospital it is the hospital management that manages the time of a surgeon. A Surgeon conducts surgery only on those patients that are brought to the operating theatre by hospital staff ready for surgery. Surgeon does not get involved in the process of preparing the patient for surgery. He is consulted from time to time, during the process of preparation, but the responsibility of ensuring that a patient is ready for surgery lies with others who work under the instructions of Hospital Management. Judges should only listen to arguments & pass Judgments. The Court Management system should ensure that a case is ready for final arguments. Of course, there are cases / situations, particularly in the criminal jurisdiction, where Judges need to be involved & judges need to be consulted from time to time. But it is the same with very complex surgery where the surgeon, experts, consultants, management work together to prepare the patient for final surgery. But the surgery is done only by a Surgeon. His time is valuable. Similarly, final arguments are heard & decision making is done only by a Judge. His time is valuable.

Judiciary has created an image in public that it is a very over worked & a very busy institution. This image is false. One in every four judges is a busy person but one in every four judges is also a very relaxed person. Analysis of 5 years of data, from 2006 to 2010, of 5 district Courts of Delhi has revealed that 5 Judges dealt with 67 Cases a day on an average where as 50 Judges dealt with only 6 Cases a day on an average. In between these two extremes 75 Judges dealt with 40 Cases a day, 120 Judges dealt with 24 Cases a day and 108 Judges dealt with only 14 Cases a day. Of course, there are different categories of Judges and certain type of cases are only handled by certain Judges etc. but the extent of unevenness in the load distribution, in Delhi District Courts at least, clearly indicates that there is huge scope for improvement. It again points to the fact that the Management of Courts in India needs to be improved. Successive Governments have done nothing to resolve the problem of delays in Judiciary.

Before I close this article I wish to say that a Judge & a Surgeon are alike in one another way. They can both kill a person through negligence. If a surgeon kills through negligence or carelessness or delay a Judge finds him guilty and punishes him. But when a Judge kills through negligence or carelessness or delay nobody declares him guilty and no body punishes him. Lords on the benches should think about it and act before masses loose complete trust on them.

Three decades ago ragging was harm less fun, meant to break ice between students but over the years this ‘ harmless pet ‘ has undergone metamorphosis into a ‘ deadly beast ’ that has taken the life of many and permanently injured many more. CURE an NGO working in the field of ragging has reported that 30 students have died, allegedly due to ragging, in the past 2 years. The national help line that was setup soon after Aman Kachroo’s death in June 2009 has recorded more than a thousand cases of ragging and experts believe that these numbers are only a tip of the ice berg. There is much more happening that is not reported. The national help line (1800 180 5522 ) has received large number of phone calls. Admittedly, not all calls received by the help line are complaints of serious ragging but the fact that so many people rang the anti ragging help line and continue to do so indicates the high level of anxiety that exists in our society on ragging. Last year 30 members of the Parliament, cutting across the party lines, asked ragging related questions in both houses of the parliament. It is yet another indicator of the seriousness of the problem.

Many in India are asking the question that if one person beats the other on a street or in an office or in the privacy of his home it is a punishable act under the Indian Penal Code. But when a student beats another student in a university or a college campus then it is called breaking the ice. How ridiculous is this logic?

(Bullying in schools is a universal phenomenon but ragging is uniquely an Indian phenomenon. It does not exist any where else except in India and in a few of her neighboring countries. Also it should not be confused with hazing in the United States. That is a very different phenomenon to Ragging).

Despite the high level of anxiety in the society there are many who do not agree that ragging should be eradicated. They believe, of course incorrectly, that it enhances the personality of those who are shy. Many say it improves bonding between students and so on. Many narrate their own experiences of 20 or 30 years ago and conclude that we are making too much of nothing. They are wrong. They do not realize that what starts as harm less fun can soon turn into a platform for a perverted mind to operate upon. Such minds are always on the look out for opportunities and ragging provides a brilliant cover much like a sick husband who beats his wife in the night and puts the blame on alcohol the following day. Alcohol is just an excuse. This man is sick. He derives pleasure from inflicting pain on others and he knows that his wife is an easy prey because she is a prisoner of her own false beliefs. She is ready to suffer pain, humiliation and abuse because she believes in keeping the matters of home within the boundaries of her home. Perpetrators of ragging are mentally sick students who like the drunk husband use ragging as an excuse to satisfy their sadistic pleasures. Victims of ragging are like those wives who believe that matters within the family must remain within the family, particularly, when they are sexually abused by their own husbands. They would rather commit suicide than stand up to their husbands. Many students who commit suicides due to ragging are sexually abused and they would rather take their lives than live with the shame of the act.

The question is why a young bride does not stand up for her rights when her perverted mother in law bullies her and why doesn’t a young student protest when he/she is being ragged? I believe it is a cultural problem. We live in the land of Dhronacharya. We justify the cruel demand by Dhronacharya of asking Eklavya for his thumb. We do not condemn Eklavya but glorify him for his sacrifice of giving his thumb to Dhronacharya. And the irony is that Dhronacharya did not even know that Eklavya was his student and Eklavya had learnt nothing from Dhronacharya. It is deeply embedded in our culture to respect and obey our teachers, elders & parents but the problem arises when these teachers, elders and parents turn out to be crooks and criminals. We have to learn to distinguish between the ones who deserve respect and ones who don’t. For a very long time we have given undue importance to seniority on the false pretence that seniors are wiser & talented. It has damaged the psychology of our society. All that we require is to identify a group of people who are junior to us and demand admiration and obedience. And what is amazing is that we do get what we ask for because as a nation we suffer from ‘ Seniority Syndrome ’ .

The solution to the problem of ragging, of course, lies in making new laws, putting preventive measures in place and punishing the perpetrators but most importantly it lies in educating the victims of their rights. We have to get rid of age old beliefs like ‘ Pati is always the Parameshwar ’ ; a grand father is always the wisest person in the house and a senior is always better than a junior. We have to understand that while tolerance is a virtue suffering injustice is a sin.

If my son Aman Kachroo was not ragged he would have been a happy kid today and perhaps a great doctor tomorrow. My wife and I and the parents of twelve other kids who died in the past one year did not deserve to suffer the pain of loosing a child; the boys and girls who got raped in colleges across the nation did not have to live with the shame and suffocate in helplessness. There are thousands of people in all age groups that nurse the scars of ragging all their lives. There is no closure to this heinous crime.

I know you must be thinking that I am not man enough to argue my case and that is why I have chosen to use an emotional tool. But that is not true. Let me draw a parallel. Let us consider a situation where a drunk husband comes home in the night, beats his wife black and blue, has forcible sex with her, and then goes off to sleep. The next morning he wakes up and puts the entire blame on alcohol. We all know that alcohol is just an excuse. This man is a sick person who derives pleasure from inflicting pain on others. The man knows that his wife is an easy prey because she is a prisoner of her own false beliefs. She believes that matters of home must be kept within the boundaries of home and to maintain that belief she is ready to suffer pain and humiliation. For the husband alcohol provides a convenient shield. Ragging is some what similar. Mentally sick students, like the drunk husband, satisfy their perversions under the excuse of ragging and the students who suffer are like the wives who believe that matters within the family must remain within the family. Clearly the students who suffer are equally at fault as the students who inflict pain on them. Today, I want to tell them that they do not have to suffer for no reason. They can lodge a compliant on a toll free number 1800 180 5522 and action will betaken. I also want to tell you that if you feel that they are embarrassed or scared to talk then you can file the complaint on their behalf. Please help them. They need your support.

You must know that, last year, Supreme Court passed an order to ban ragging in all educational institutions including in private hostels, cafeterias and lodges that are outside the campuses. Ragging is banned with out any exceptions and there is nothing like soft ragging or hard ragging. Ragging is ragging and it doesn’t matter where the act is performed. It is illegal. University Grants commission has published what constitutes ragging. The details are on their web site and on the web site of the Aman Movement for eradication of ragging, amanmovement.org. Basically, what it says is that you can not force your will on any other student, regardless of whether he/she is your senior or junior or is in the same class as you.

All of you know that if you get involved in ragging you will be punished severely. But what you may not know is that from now onwards your college authorities too are penally culpable if they do not act on a complaint of ragging. This means that the authorities too can go to jail if they do not act and naturally they are not likely to shield you any longer as they used to do in the past. And there is some thing else that I would like to tell you. UGC regulations place the ‘burden of proof on the accused’. What it means is that the person accused of ragging has to prove that he/she was not involved in ragging. The accuser has only to lodge a complaint. It is, of course, very tough on the accused but it only goes to show that the authorities are serious about clamping down on the evil practice of ragging.

We all know that making laws are necessary and punishment is a deterrent but we also know that laws and punishment alone do not solve the problem. There are many who break laws because they seek excitement from breaking laws and there are others who break the laws because they like to oppose every thing. When such people get caught they, of course, regret it but, unfortunately, it is often too late. Please do not come under peer pressure and get thrown out of the college. Ragging is an act of shame. It is nothing to be proud of.

I know many of you must be thinking that I have created a monster out of some thing that is a bit of harmless fun and laughter. I agree that ragging, for most of you, is a bit of fun and laughter but remember those with the perverted mind are always on the look out. Some thing that you might have started for fun and laughter can get very quickly out of hand and turn into an ugly incidence of rape or death or injury. Would you be able to live with that guilt for rest of your life? Think about it?

Say no to Ragging and say it loud and clear. Be proud that your college is Ragging free. Raggers are weak people. It is not fashionable to be weak any more.

It is ironical when the rest of India admires West Bengal for retaining its strong culture, literature, music & traditions we see the tradition of Ragging is also being retained in West Bengal with same intensity as music & literature. Bengal was one of the first few states in India that started a movement for eradication of Ragging through SAVE (Society Against Violence in Education). When the rest of the Country has changed West Bengal continues to be infested with violence in its Universities & Colleges. The national help line ( 1800 180 55 22) that was set up in June 2009, has received 281 complaints from West Bengal in the past 4 years. Of these 50 complaints were registered in the past 6 months. Observers say that these numbers are just a tip of the Ice Berg. The real numbers are much higher.

Clearly it is not a moment of pride for people of West Bengal to note that only UP at 432 cases has recorded higher numbers complaints in the past 4 years. Orissa & MP trail West Bengal at 239 & 199 complaints respectively. We have registered nearly 140 cases in 4 years from Colleges that are affiliated to West Bengal Technical University. The only other Universities in the same category are Biju Patnaik University in Orissa & Gautum Budh Technical University in UP, both at 140 cases & Rajiv Gandhi Technical University in MP at 105 Cases . The National Institute of Technology, Durgapur, has the honour of being amongst the top 3 cololeges that has recorded highest number of cases of Ragging at 18 cases in the past 4 years. I can not guarantee that these numbers are 100% correct but I can assure you that these numbers are not 100% incorrect either. They convey the message loud & clear that West Bengal must put its act together.

Many argue that the scenario of Ragging in our Colleges will change only after the society at large will change. I disagree with this line of argument. There is no doubt that change in attitude in the society will have an influence on Ragging in West Bengal but one does not have to wait for such changes to happen & do nothing. West Bengal has made progress in eradication of Ragging in the past 4 years. But it is not enough. Bengal Engineering & Science University (BESU) used to be notorious for Ragging until the college administration under the leadership of Prof. Ray decided to put a stop to it by adapting a policy of Zero Tolerance. Jadhavpur University has also an excellent record of progress in reduction in incidences of Ragging. The University used to have a very bad reputation for Ragging a few years ago. It will be very unfortunate & a great set back to the movement of eradication of Ragging in West Bengal if the administration of Jadhavpur University has to back down to unlawful demands of a few hooligans. I urge the peoples of West Bengal to support the administration of West Bengal at this Critical moment. The entire National Anti Ragging Movement supports the administration of Jadavpur University, unconditionally. They are a responsible administration. Their Judgment can not be and should not be questioned in this manner. If students believe that the administration has erred in this case then they must seek for correction through the process of Law. ‘Gherao’ & Ragging are both things of the past era. It is unacceptable to modern India.

The Regulations of the University Grants Commission, based on the Judgment of the 8th May, 2009, of the Hon. Supreme Court are very clear. The responsibility of investigation & prescribing punishment lies with the Anti Ragging Committee of the College. It is not right on any body’s part to question the wisdom of the Committee through a process of Gherao. The Hon. Supreme Court & the National Human Rights Commission say that Ragging is an Act of Human Rights Violation. The Regulations framed by the University Grants Commission & adapted by all statutory Regulatory authorities & the Government of India have defined Ragging as any act of violence, Physical or Psychological, between any two students, regardless of whether they are seniors or Juniors or of the same class. This definition is different from the conventional understanding of the term – Ragging - which was restricted between a senior student & a fresher. This modification in the definition of Ragging was done deliberately & after much serious thought. The reason is that a great number of students who come from economically weaker sections of the society or who are differently able or shy or from rural back grounds etc. suffer in the hands of bully’s from their own class. Given that traditionally Police does not interfere in matters within a campus unless they are called by the administration to deal with serious matters of Crime, it was felt, that there was no need to change that tradition/convention. Regulations on Ragging will provide college administration with a frame work of law under which they can deal with such acts of crime without asking for support from the Police. In this context, I believe, the administration of the Jadhavpur University has acted correctly. It will be a sad day for democracy in India if a few hooligans are allowed to take law in their own hands.

Societies Registration Act was enacted in British India, in 1860, for registration of literary, scientific and charitable societies. The law makers of 1860, who made this act will turn in their graves if they get to know that 35 societies, in free independent India, spend as much as 5 billion pounds a year through this act. That is what Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan spends in per a year through grants to charitable societies. CAG is not authorized to audit them because they are “charitable societies”.

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan is operated through 36 Government owned Societies in 36 states/UT’s of India. I do not see as to what is common between members of a Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Society in terms of science, literature or charity. They are all paid government officials who are doing a job. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan is not a charity. It is a Government program, funded from the consolidated fund of India. The government of India has borrowed money to finance this program. Bilateral & multilateral agencies have provided large sums of money to support this program. It is tax payer’s money for the benefit of populations of India. I do not understand how a Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan Society qualifies to be a charity? I am at a loss to know how the registrar of societies allows governments to register societies that are clearly not meant for charity, advancement of science and/or literature. These societies are meant to execute valid & legitimate government programs. Members of Parliament should bring this matter up for discussion in the parliament. They should either amend the societies act or refrain governments from misusing it.

Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan spends as much money per year as much the Government of J&K spends in a year or as much the Government of Himachal Pradesh spends in a year or as much as several governments of the North East spend in a year. For J&K, there is a full fledged office of an Accountant General in Srinagar with hundreds of auditors working to make sure that government money is spent properly & wisely. On the other hand, for SSA there is a bunch of consultants, (many of them retired & tired ), a bunch of opportunistic chartered accountants that report to a few bureaucrats who are more interested in checking the validity of the rubber stamp that validates the accounts than checking the validity of the accounts themselves.

Peoples of India have given CAG unlimited powers to protect their money but CAG has let them down. Article 20 of the DPC act, (i.e., the act that governs the functioning of CAG), says that “CAG may propose to the President that he may be authorised to undertake the audit of the accounts of any body or authority, the audit of the accounts of which has not been entrusted to him by law, if he is of the opinion that such audit is necessary because a substantial amount has been invested in, or advanced to, such body or authority” . I beg to ask CAG does he not think that 50,000 crores a year spent on SSA is substantial enough to invoke article 20 of the DPC act? Law makers who included article 20 in the DPC did not include it for nothing. If you ask them they will say that a 1,000 Crores is sufficient to invoke this provision never mind 50,000 crores each year. 10 billion dollars per year is a huge sum of money even by the American standards to go unaudited each year. Incidentally SSA is not the only government program that is executed through societies. There are other programs that use the societies act too. Therefore, combined spending through societies must easily exceed a lakh of crore of rupees each year for Government of India, alone. And still CAG does not think that it is substantial enough to invoke article 20 of the DPC act. CAG’s excuse is that he is short of man power. This is not valid. CAG’s men need systems & software to conduct effective audits within shortest possible time. CAG is miles behind in this direction. As far as I know it is still coloured pencils & paper in CAG’s office. Forensic auditing is a very long distance away.

The misuse of the act is not restricted only to some programs which are termed as “mission mode programs” like the SSA. It is common practice for governments to set up consulting companies, disguised as government owned societies, to execute projects that are paid for from government funds without any competitive bidding. (Please raed the related article – Part 2 on Nomination). Of course it is a violation of section 14 of our constitution to give jobs to government owned companies & societies but this happens all the time. CAG and/or CVC do not object.

The Bihar Women Development Corporation that has been registered as a society. Naturally, being a society it can not be audited by CAG. Being a society this corporation has no obligation to follow any prescribed financial standards. If this corporation was registered as a company, it would still not be auditable by CAG but at least it would have been expected to adhere to the company law regulations. It would be expected to follow the Accounting Standards that are applicable in India. It would be expected to produce accounts in a format that is prescribed by the companies act. But as a society it has no obligations to follow any prescribed format or standard. I am again very surprised to see how the Registrar of societies has allowed a management consulting company to be registered as a society. Just because it is meant to help women or children does not mean it is a charity. It is a government’s management consulting company. It is not a charity.

Article 15 of the DPC act says where any grant or loan is given for any specific purpose from the consolidated fund of India to any authority or body the CAG shall scrutinize the procedures by which the sanctioning authority satisfies itself as to the fulfillment of the conditions subject to which such grants were given and shall for this purpose have right of access to the books and accounts of that authority or body. Therefore, CAG is obliged to ask the Ministry of Human Resources as to what procedures are being used by the ministry to satisfy the fulfillment of the conditions for which grants are given by the ministry to various Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan societies. If the governments of India insist on spending large sums of monies through societies then it is about time that CAG steps in for proper audit. But CAG is quite happy to be a happy spectator.

Floods are caused by excessive rainfall but flood damage & loss of life is caused by poor management. The National Disaster Management Agency is not interested in prevention or reduction of losses due to flooding but only in post flood rescue & relief. We have zero capability to issue warnings for evacuation. We have no legislation for dam safety & operations of reservoirs.

Each case of flooding happens for a different reason but lack of Legislation, poor Planning & lack of Warning Systems is common in all cases of flooding. Srinagar floods were caused due to negligence of the authorities. The report commissioned by Central Water Commission after Srinagar floods is a secret document because the authorities of CWC are not interested in learning from mistakes of the past & improving their systems. They are only interested in cover up & blame game.

The appraisal report of 2008 floods in India, published in 2010 by CWC, said that during the flood season 2008, in all, 6691 flood forecasts were issued by the DIrectorate of CWC with an accuracy level exceeding 97.95%. Clearly CWC claims that flood forecasting in India is a highly accurate but in Flood Forecasting techniques & standards in India are at a very primitive stage. By world standards the work that CWC does in relation to real time flood forecasting would not even quality to be called Real time Flood Forecasting. The accuracy level of 97.95% is an illusion.

One feature that is important in Real Time Flood Forecasting is the ‘Lead Time’ of the forecast. The lead time means how much in advance the forecast is made. Accuracy of a forecast depends on the Lead Time. If CWC can say a week in advance that there will be a flood of X magnitude it is of immense use to authorities compared to if CWC says the same thing an hour in advance. Within a decreasing lead time, the accuracy of forecast increases but its utility decreases. Even Sadhu’s sitting on the banks of Ganges can make a good short time lead forecast. CWC in the entire Appraisal Report, has made no reference to the Lead Time.

Central Water Commission says that through its twenty flood forecasting divisions it issues forecasts to various user agencies, which includes various civil/engineering agencies of the States/ Central Governments such as Irrigation! Revenue/ Railways/ public undertakings and Dam & Barrage Authorities/ District Magistrates/ Sub Divisional Officers besides the Defence Authorities involved in the flood loss mitigation work. The question arises as to why National Disaster Management Authority ( NDMA ) is not included in this list. Why Emergency Response Administrations/ Rescue Services / Radio Stations etc. are not included ? It is because CWC does not see any function for its forecasts. For CWC forecasting is a bureaucratic exercise that must be done to earn a salary. It is interesting to note that CWC does not see any role of Rainfall Estimation or Rainfall Forecasting in Real Time Forecasting of Floods. CWC’s Flood Forecasting Division has no connection with the Meteorology or Meteorological Office for rainfall forecasts. Understanding of CWC, as far as flood forecasting is concerned is very poor.

When people of J&K asked their Government as to why the state had failed to issue flood warning the state administration quickly passed on the buck to CWC. On the other hand CWC officials were very quick in saying that flood forecasting & flood management is a state subject. It is highly regrettable that officials of CWC do not own their mistakes gracefully & make an effort to improve. The systems that exist in CWC for flood forecasting are primitive. Officers of the Directorate are not experts in flood forecasting. They are in positions of authority because of seniority in service & not because of seniority in expertise or experience.

Srinagar Floods were caused due to negligence of the authorities. The report commissioned by CWC after Srinagar Floods is a secret document obviously to cover up the mistakes. I do not understand why that is the case?

Induced Flooding: It is very common for fishermen in India to loose their valuables because water levels in the river where are working/living increases suddenly. This is not because of excessive rainfall but because authorities have released water from an upstream reservoir without any warning. When floods are caused by excessive, uncontrolled and/or unplanned releases from reservoirs we can call this type of flooding induced flooding. Some time there is also loss of life because of induced flooding. It is not uncommon in India.

Cascading reservoirs: With so many reservoirs being built, for example on the Ganges in Uttarakhand, and each reservoir is owned & operated by a private operators then it is natural for a operator to fill his reservoir to his maximum possible capacity. If a reservoir downstream is full & the upstream reservoir suddenly releases a flood wave then the down stream reservoir will not be able to accommodate the flood wave. There is no legislation in India to say how much capacity each reservoir operator must leave open in his/her reservoir to accommodate a flood wave. A safe operating policy is clearly linked with the methodology of forecasting inflows into reservoirs. CWC is given the responsibility to do this kind of work in the Narmada basin but what they do is simply laughable.