Sibal, Shourie spar over VSNL disinvestment

suchithkc

New Delhi, Mar 22 : A fresh controversy raged today over Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal ordering a probe into the disinvestment of erstwhile VSNL during NDA regime in favour of Tatas but the then telecom minister Arun Shourie hit back calling Sibal a "bully".
"It has come to my notice that the disinvestment of Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited (VSNL) in 2002 does not seem to be fair and transparent.
"Prima facie the way issue of demerger of 773.13 acres of surplus land of VSNL was handled in 2002 and thereafter, not only the interests of investors but also the interests of the government seems to have been adversely affected," Sibal said in a note to Telecom Secretary R Chandrashekhar.
The official was asked to constitute a high level committee under Additional Secretary S R Rao to examine the issue in detail and to submit its report by this month end.
Sibal expressed concern over the "inordinate delay" in the hiving off/demerger of the government''s surplus land being "enjoyed" by Tatas without paying a single rupee.
Accusing Sibal of providing perverted facts, Shourie said the government was already sinking under a cascade of corruption allegations and the minister was only adding to its problems.
"If you see it is the bull-headedness of a bully," Shourie said dismissing allegations of any wrongdoing and was prepared for any probe into the disinvestment of VSNL.
He said if there was any delay in the demerger of the land and if a probe has to be ordered it should be against P Chidambaram and Pranab Mukherjee, the past and present Finance Ministers in the UPA government in past seven years.
Shourie defended the disinvestment saying stringent conditions were laid down that prohibited the sale of surplus land by winning bidders.
Sibal replied that Shourie was welcome to call him any names saying that is his previllage.
He said when the disinvestment took place in 2002 why was this 773 acres of land was part of the deal at all.
However, Shourie maintained that Tatas did not acquire any land and they did not acquire any right over that land.