Ashok Gehlot

Rajasthan approves
WB aided state
highways project

JAIPUR, Jan 20: The Rajasthan Government has approved....more

Jaswant Singh

No dialogue until
Pak creates proper
environment: Jaswant

LONDON, Jan 20: India has ruled out a dialogue with......more

NBW against Win
Chadha cancelled

NEW DELHI, Jan 20: A Delhi Court today cancelled the.....more

From B L Kak

NEW DELHI, Jan 20: Kashmir’s tallest politician, Dr Farooq......more

Muslim women
gangraped, CBI
probe demanded

AGARTALA, Jan 20: Jawahar Saha, a Congress MLA in Tripura, .......more

Manaviyam will
be held on Jan 28

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, Jan 20: The twice-postponed formal inauguration of.....more

Inter-state gang
of kidnappers
busted, 3 held

PATNA, Jan 20: In a major breakthrough, police have busted an ......more

Several ships continue to be stationed
Port, dock employees strike
paralyses 7 major ports

MUMBAI, Jan 20: The indefinite agitation launched by port....more

Rajasthan approves WB aided state highways project

JAIPUR, Jan 20: The Rajasthan Government has approved a World Bank aided Rs 1560.61 crore state highway project under which 876 km roads will be developed during the next five year.

A decision to this effect was taken at a cabinet meeting presided over by Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot here yesterday, said an official spokesman.

The project would connect the commercial transportation with the national highways which would help reduce time and fuel consuptions of the vehicles considerably. Of the total cost of the project, Rs 1105.80 crore is the World Bank loan and the rest the State Government’s share therein.

The project included widening of the main streets upto seven metre strengthening them and construction of necessary culverts.

Besides, 1800 km long other highways and district main roads’ special maintenance and renewal would also be done.

Two lane roads would be constructed under the project as per international standards so that no renewal of roads was needed till eight years after their completion.

During the execution of the project, the concerned department would have an opportunity to exchange information and acquire most modern technology on the maintenance of roads which would help modernisation of the department’s functioning. (UNI)

No dialogue until Pak creates proper
environment: Jaswant

LONDON, Jan 20: India has ruled out a dialogue with Pakistan till Islamabad created a proper environment by adjuring violence, giving up encouragement to cross-border terrorism and ending the daily cry of jihad against it.

These are not preconditions, these are essential integrals for the creation of a proper environment, External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh said last night on BBC world TV’s ‘Asia Today’ programme.

We will remain committed to dialogue and reconciliation. But it is obvious that, for this, not as a precondition but as an integral of the dialogue process itself, a proper environment be created, Singh said.

He said Pakistan has to recognise that this compulsive hostility that it demonstrates towards India must cease.

I don’t wish to particularise it and concentrate only on the hijack at Kandahar, which was a trial for large number of Indians, but there is need for Pakistan to come to terms with reality, he said.

Asked to define reality, he said the reality being that India really has no hostility towards Pakistan, that Pakistan can simply not have a position of perpetual confrontation towards India which will cause irreparable damage.

Asked whether the two countries were conducting a proxy war, Singh said Pakistan is certainly conducting a clandestine war, not a proxy war.

And so far as India is concerned and certainly since the BJP Government came to power, not last year but in 1998, there is no question of any such kind of activity in Pakistan ever having been encouraged by India, he said.

Answering a query on whether he has any hostility towards Gen. (Pervez) Musharraf, chief executive of Pakistan, the External Affairs Minister said Of course not, not in the slightest. I scarcely know the gentleman.

Asked whether the working group on counter-terrorism set up at the tenth round of Indo-US talks on nuclear issues was linked to the recent hijacking of the Indian Airlines plane, Jaswant Singh replied in the negative.

It is not a consequence of the hijacking alone — if that’s what your mean by linking — but it is a Joint Working Group that India and us have set up to combat the international menace of terrorism because the assumption being that there is recognition by both countries that there is indeed such menace and it needs to be addressed jointly.

To a query whether US Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott agreed with India’s position that Pakistan was directly involved in the hijacking, Singh said well, we discussed it but it was not my expectation that I will want from Strobe Talbott a judgement one way or another. These are necessarily issues that are considered at some length by various countries from different angles.

Asked whether he told Talbott when India would sign the CTBT, Jaswant Singh said it is not a question of when we would sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Our position is very clear with this regard.

We, in any case, continue to observe the voluntary moratorium on any further testing and we have quite explicitly stated that the commitment that India has made of converting this voluntary moratorium into a de jure obligation requires that we build within India as wide a political consensus as we can.

Answering a question on any plans to reduce tension in the South Asian region, he said India has already demonstrated the steps it could take.

India after all is the initiator of the dialogue (with Pakistan) and the process of reconciliation. That was what the dramatic and historic bus journey to lahore was about. It remains a matter of great regret and disappointment both to Prime Minister A B Vajpayee and himself personally that the bus was turned away from Lahore and sent to Kargil, he said.

Asked whether India’s hostility to Pakistan was based on the belief that Musharraf was in charge of Pakistan’s army during the Kargil conflict, Jaswant Singh said India has no such hostility as the questioner suggested.

In fact for the people of Pakistan, this Government and the people of India have nothing but the greatest of fellow feeling, which is what the bus was all about.

It is not hostility — Kargil demonstrated not just a physical aggression by the armed forces of Pakistan, following as it did upon Lahore, above all it demonstrated a transgression upon the territory of trust.

The physical aggression was vacated, as it invariably would be by any self-respecting nation. How do you regain that territory of trust, it’s not hostility, it’s an attempt to slowly regain trust between the two countries, Jaswant Singh said.

Asked who would take the first step towards rebuilding that trust, to put the bus back from Kargil to Lahore, Singh replied that the bus incidentally continues to ply.

But before taking any fresh step Pakistan has to recognise that this compulsive hostility that it demonstrates towards India must cease. (PTI)

NBW against Win Chadha cancelled

NEW DELHI, Jan 20: A Delhi Court today cancelled the non-bailable warrant against Dubai-based Non-Resident Indian businessman Wisheshwar Nath Chadha, an accused in the Rs 64 crore Bofors Pay-offs Case.

Special Judge Ajit Bharihoke, who cancelled the warrant issued against Chadha on December 14 last year, directed him to appear before the court on the next date of hearing on February 3. (PTI)

Former J&K Chief Secretary speaks
Mufti Sayeed’s daughter dearer than nation

From B L Kak

NEW DELHI, Jan 20: Kashmir’s tallest politician, Dr Farooq Abdullah, though known for his weakness for power and pelf, has developed the habit of carrying his resignation letter in one of his pockets. And if there was any doubt about it, it was set at rest by Dr Farooq himself in December 1989-perhaps, for the first time-in the wake of a crisis in Srinagar following the abduction of the daughter of Mufti Mohammed Sayeed, who was then the Union Home Minister.

Dr Farooq Abdullah opposed tooth and nail the demand by the kidnappers of Ms Rubbaiya Sayeed for the release of some militants. Kidnappers belonged to the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF). The JKLF had demanded the release of five militants, namely, Abdul Hamid Sheikh, Ghulam Nabi Bhat, Mohammed Altaf, Noor Mohammed Kalwal and Javed Zargar. On Decembr 9, 1989, however, the JKLF dropped the demand for Javed Zargar and replaced it with Abdul Ahad Waza.

On his return to Srinagar after cutting short his stay in London, Chief Minister, Dr Farooq convened a series of meetings and invited suggestions on how to bring about safe release of Ms Rubbaiya Sayeed without freeing any of the militants as demanded by the JKLF. According to Mr Moosa Raza, who was Chief Secretary to the J&K Government at that point of time, Dr Farooq Abdullah was unhappy at the pressure the VP Singh Government was exerting to release the militants.

Some pages of Mr Moosa Raza’s diary clearly indicate that the then Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, Gen. KV Krishna Rao, speedily intervened to prevent Dr Farooq from tendering his resignation, when the latter ran fast and furious over New Delhi’s decision to concede the kidnappers’ demand for the release of the five militants in exchange for the daughter of Mufti Sayeed. Dr Farooq had feared the long-term repercussions.

Mr Moosa Raza has written: "It was under extreme pressure from the Centre that he (Dr Farooq) had even agreed to release the militants. But to be faced with the situation of having to release the militants without even getting the girl simultaneously, and having to wait for three hours before knowing whether the Government has been taken for a ride or not, was not the kind of situation either he or I were prepared to face. He was prepared to tender his resignation there and then. I think he spoke to the Governor, General Krishna Rao, who perhaps restrained him from precipitating any action at such a critical moment".

The then Cabinet Secretary in New Delhi, Mr TN Seshan, was in constant touch with Mr Moosa Raza. Was in Delhi on December 6, 1989, for what he says "some important meetings" with the Cabinet Secretary and the Planning Commission. Mr Moosa Raza, too, had an appointment to meet the Home Minister, Mufti Mohammed Sayeed, in the afternoon of Friday, December 8. This was his first meeting with him after the Mufti took over as Home Minister.

Mr Moosa Raza writes: "I was busy in the afternoon and when I had reached North Block, at 4 pm, the Minister’s personal assistant told me that the Home Minister had just received news of the kidnapping of his daughter, who was a medical intern, and was quite perturbed. When I was ushered in, the Mufti was on the phone. He gestured to me to take a seat. The conversation was in Kashmiri, but I could make out that it was about the kidnapping. When he kept down the receiver and turned to me, I could see that he was calm and collected".

From the office of the Mufti, Mr Moosa Raza proceeded directly to the Cabinet Secretariat. The Cabinet Secretary had been called away by Prime Minister, Mr VP Singh. After his meeting with the Cabinet Secretary he was made to attend a meeting of the Crisis Management Group (CMG). Along with the Cabinet Secretary, the Director of the Intelligence Bureau, Director of the National Security Guard and Director General of Joint Intelligence Committee, the Home Minister himself was present along with Mr Arif Mohammed Khan and Mr Arun Nehru.

According to Mr Mossa Raza’s diary, dthere was meagre information available to the CMG at this point of time, beyond the bare facts of the kidnapping. It was, therefore, decided that he (Mr Moosa Raza) should fly to Srinagar to take charge of the State Crisis Management Group, establish contacts with the kidnappers and devise ways and means of getting Ms Rubbaiya released.

On December 9, at 4 in the morning, Mr Moosa Raza, accompanied by Mr Roy, joint director of IB, and Mr Ved Marwah, Director-General of the NSG, and two negotiators from the Home Ministry, left Delhi in a small plane. After reaching Srinagar, Mr Moosa Raza established contact with the deputy director of Intelligence Bureau, Mr AS Daulat (now the chief of the RAW), to obtain his input.

Mr Moosa Raza has an interesting piece of information: Through "good offices" of Mr AS Daulat, two unofficial mediators were located. One was Mr Zafar Meraj, a journalist, and the other was Mr Vijay Dhar, the son of Mr DP Dhar, who had been in the Central Cabinet of Mrs Indira Gandhi. Mr Moosa Raza writes: "I also got in touch with several others incljuding Mr Sofi of Srinagar Times, Mr Sarwar, Ms Shabnam, daughter of Mr Abdul Ghani Lone, etc".

Former Chief Secretary of Jammu and Kashmir has admitted that the State Police, CID and IB failed to locate the ‘safe house’ where Ms Rubbaiya Sayeed was lodged by her kidnappers. During the course of the next three or four days (after his arrival in Srinagar), Mr Moosa Raza was informed that CID and IB located several houses in Baramulla, Sopore, Maharaj Ganj and Ralwalpora. However, on investigations, they all turned out to be false leads.

Mr Moosa Raza also says: "The militants did not trust the telephone system and were apprehensive that we would trace the call…. The Cabinet Secretary was literally on my back. He wanted half hourly reports. Since communications between the control room in Srinagar and the Cabinet Secretariat was neither fail-safe nor secure, I had to communicate with him from the secure line in the IB headquarters on Gupkar Road. I had therefore to use the IB control room more often than the police headquarters. Even after that, the Cabinet Secretary was not happy".

Equally interesting piece of information from Mr Moosa Raza: "The IB believed that all conversations between the State and the Centre were sprone to be tapped even in the telephone exchange as the militants had sympathisers there. So the Cabinet Secretary preferred that I communicate with him in Tamil, as he believed gthat there was remote chance of Kashmiri militants knowing the language. I had therefore to resuscitate my school Tamil-a language in which I had not communicated anything sensitive and serious in decades".

Yet another revelation by Mr Moosa Raza: At 1.30 am on December 13, 1989, the Cabinet Secretary (Mr TN Seshan) told him on telephone in stiff and formal tone: "This is the Cabinet Secretary to the Government of India, speaking to the Chief Secretary of the State of J&K. I am speaking from the chamber of the Prime Minister of India. The Cabinet Secretary desires the State Government to note that it is their undiluted responsibility to ensure the safe release of the hostage without any injury to her and we expect that all action you take will be consistent with this requirement". Having made that statement, Mr Sehan abruptly broke the connection.

Mr Moosa Raza, like others in the State Government, heaved a sigh of relief when the Mufti’s daughter was finally freed in exchange for the release of the five militants. He, however, laments: "Neither I nor the police even got the opportunity of debriefing her subsequently. She could have given us valuable information. I could not even learn where she had been held captive. It was almost 10 years later that somebodhy showed me the burnt out ruins of a forest department hut in the heart of Dachigam sanctuary as the place where Rubaiya Sayeed had been held captive for five days".

Several ships continue to be stationed
Port, dock employees strike paralyses 7 major ports

MUMBAI, Jan 20: The indefinite agitation launched by port and dock employees of eleven major ports, which entered the third day today, has paralysed the cargo loading and unloading activities in two of the major ports here — the Mumbai Port and the adjoining Jawaharlal Nerhu Port.

Even as Naval and Coast Guard personnel along with Home Guards are assisting the port officers and the slimline workers who did not join the agitation, activities at both the ports were affected as agents are also not coming forward for unloading the cargo. Several ships continue to be stationed across the harbour waiting for berthing signal.

At the Mumbai Port here, there was no work at the Indira Dock though some of the vessels emptied their contents at the marine oil terminal at Jawahar Dweep and chemical terminal at Pir Pau. Reports reaching here from Bhava Sheva said that activities were also affected at the Jawahar Lal Nehru Port, the most mordern port of the country which endeavours to be a hub port.

The indefinite agitation was launched on Monday midnight after the talks between the unions led by five major Federation of Port and Dock Workers and Ministry of Surface Transport failed. The agitating unions led by All India Port and Dock Workers’ Federation has squarely blamed the Government for the strike and said that the responsibility of inconvenience caused to the public and setback to the economy rests solely on the Government.

Meanwhile, the Union Government warned that it would resort to harsh measures if the nationwide strike was not not called-off immediately and invited the leaders of the federations for immediate talks so that productivity and cargo loading and unloading was not affected.

Though the unions claimed that the strike has "totally paralysed" activities in the ports, the Government said that work at port and docks have been partially affected but contingency plans have been drawn up and personnel of Indian Navy and Home Guards have been moved in ports to maintain essential services.

Mumbai Port Trust Chairman A K Mago said that Federation has made proposals seeking revised wages and allowances having impact of 106 per cent increase. Management’s offer was an increase of 28 per cent which was raised to about 30 per cent in subsequent conciliation proceedings. "Even 28 to 30 per cent rise puts a financial burden of around Rs 75 crore on Mumbai Port," he said.

Management sources said that such enormous rise will result in ports having huge deficit positions. Of the one lakh odd agitating employees, over 30,000 are from Mumbai Port.

The earlier agreement of wage revision that was implemented in 1989 and expired in December 1997, had offered a 19 per cent increase in the wages. In June 1998, the Ministry of Surface Transport constituted a Bi-partite Wage Negotiation Committee (BWNC) headed by Chairman of Indian Ports Association M P Pinto, who is also the Chairman of the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust. The committee has representatives of unions as well as from the port management.

Union sources said that since August 1998, at least eleven meetings were held with the Government authorities, however, the talks failed and finally the unions and federations had to resort to an indefinite agitation. Veteran trade unionists S R Kulkarni and Manohar Kotwal yesterday announced the decision to go on a strike.

Mr Mago said that present expenditure on salaries and wages by the Mumbai Port was Rs 350 crore as against the total operating expenditure of Rs 510 crore — that is nearly 75 per cent. With the proposed increase of 30 per cent, the Mumbai Port would have deficit in its accounts, he said and added that the port was not in a position to sustain such a hike.

The president of All India Port and Dock Workers’ Federation in a release issued stated that the strike was total and peaceful at all the major ports and entire work of loading and unloading of cargoes to and from vessels, movement of ships, railway transportation work and handling of ships by marine workers (flotilla workers), workmen employed at workshops, clearance of cargoes from the ports and transportation of containers by transport workers in the ports has come to a total halt.

Similarly, the workers of Food Corporation of India, Central Warehousing Corporation and Maharashtra State Warehousing Corporation all over Maharashtra, have also joined the indefinite strike, which would affect distribution of foodgrains and other essential commodities to fair price shops.

Though the Minister of Surface Transport appreciated the major demands put forward by the five recognised federations and agreed with the arguments advanced by their leaders of the federations in support of their claims, he refused to incorporate his personal commitment in the appeal he was to issue to the federations’ leaders.

On demands of the workers regarding reduction in the period of settlement for ten to five years, restoration of rates of HRA without ceiling, payment of city port allowance as was earlier agreed to by the management and payment of all allowances with effect from January one 1998, the minister did not give any commitment except informing the leaders federation that some of the issues were covered by the general guidelines issued by the cabinet in respect of employees of Public Sector Undertakings. The minister also observed that if and when these guidelines are modified by the Government, the claims of port and dock workers could be considered at that time.

While justifying the demands of the workers, Mr Kulkarni brought to the notice of the minister the letter addressed by the Ministry of Surface Transport to chairmen of all the Major Port Trust and Dock Labour Boards in 1993 denying reimbursement of expenditures incurred by the ports to pay compensation to those workers who retired under voluntary retirement scheme on the grounds that these boards were not Public Sector Undertakings.

"However, the same ministry is telling us now that we are governed by the guidelines issued by the cabinet regarding the periodicity of the settlement and payment of HRA, CCA and other allowances from prospective date, he pointed out." The leaders of all the five federations made their best efforts to avert the strike provided the basic issues were resolved.

However, they were reluctently compelled to direct the workers to launch the indefinite strike due to failure of the ministry to give a positive assurance on their justified demands. Mr Kulkarni said but made it clear that there was no question of the workers confronting the Government or throwing any challenge to it. In fact, the last wage revision settlement which was concluded in 1994 without any confrontation or nation-wide strike proved the bonafide of the workers and their leaders.

Mr Kulkarni deplored deployment of armed forces, particularly the Navy, Coast Guards and Home Guards to break the strike. "In a democratic country like India, we prefer to settle labour disputes through the process of collective bargaining. However, it is well known that though the port trusts are autonomous bodies, there is undue interference in their working by the Government."

He hoped that wiser counsel will prevail and the port authorities and the Minister of Surface Transport will resume negotiations to conclude a satisfactory settlement on the demands of the five major federations of port and dock workers.

Meanwhile, National Union of Seafarers of India (NUSI) general secretary Leo Barnes has issued a statement in support of the strike saying "after the last agreement expired on December 31,1997, the port and dock workers of India have been waiting for about two years in vain for the authorities to finalise the settlement over their demands for wage increase and upward revision of various other conditions of work and service. Thus,the fresh settlement is long overdue."

It one of the stalling tactics adopted by the authorities was to insist on a ten-year contract, he said and added that the unions have obviously rejected this proposal in view of ever changing conditions in a developing economy which victimise the working men and women first and foremost.

Having failed to evoke positive response from the Government over their just, fair and legitimate demands the unions had no alternative but to unitedly resist the might of the Government which has deployed armed forces to carry out the industrial work in the ports and docks, he added. (UNI)