Economy
Cabinet clears World Bank project for Swachh Bharat Abhiyan
New Delhi : The union cabinet on Wednesday announced clearance for a $1,500 million World Bank project to support Swachh Bharat Abhiyan in rural India.
 
Telecom Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad told reporters that under the scheme separate parameters will be fixed for each beneficiary states.
 
"In September 2014, the government set certain parameters for the states to get the benedfit. These parameters include reduction in open defecation and so on," he said.
 
The minister also announced that in next three years, the government will construct at least 1 crore houses in rural areas with an estimated expenditure of Rs.81,975 crore.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

Why India’s governance frontlines are cash starved
Between 2010 and 2015, funding shortfalls to local governments nationwide - rural and urban - were as high as half the sanctioned amount and annual payments fluctuated extensively, with variations peaking in the slowdown years 2011 and 2012, according to a new paper.
 
Central government grants are a financial lifeline for panchayati raj - or village level - institutions and urban local bodies, entrusted with essential sanitation and public health services in rural and urban India. The failure to get the money due to them is largely because they did not fulfil funding conditions: holding elections, handling money and filing paperwork.
 
Local bodies are the nodes to translate sustainable development goals into reality, said the paper, Preserving the Incentive Properties of Statutory Grants by Indira Rajaraman, member of the 13th Finance Commission, and Manish Gupta, deputy director with the commission, published in the Economic & Political Weekly.
 
India has a lot of ground to cover in achieving sustainable development goals, the data reveal. Consider water and sanitation:
 
* Barely 30.80 percent of rural households get tap water; 70.60 percent of urban households do, according to the 2011 census.
 
* Only six percent of rural India and 44 percent of urban India are connected to a closed drainage system, according to the 2011 census.
 
* In urban India alone, no more than 30 percent of sewage generated by 377 million people flows through treatment plants, IndiaSpend has reported.
 
When local bodies fall short of funds, or are uncertain about steady income, public services suffer.
 
Administrative skills fall short, contribute to the money shortfall
 
The 13th Finance Commission designed local body grants for 2010 to 2015 as part unconditional - about two-thirds of the grant - and part performance-based.
 
All that states had to do to receive their basic grant was to hold local body elections, since the money can only be given during their term of office, and transfer previous dues to local bodies within five days of receiving them from the Centre.
 
Still, basic fund release to rural and urban local bodies across India fell short by six percent over the five-year term. The average shortfall for 2011 and 2012 alone touched 13.75 percent, more than double the five-year average.
 
Local bodies in only a handful of states received full basic grants over the five years. Local bodies in eight states that held elections received no basic grants for one or more years, which means they failed to confirm that they had handed over funds from previous terms, the second requirement for disbursement.
 
“Such administrative inability at the state level is a concern because the procedure was hardly complicated,” said Rajaraman.
 
Some states appear to lack administrative capacity to deal with the Centre’s bureaucracy.
 
“Even when you meet the criteria, you need some skill to get funds released,” said Rajaraman. “Of the five states which managed to obtain both rural and urban grants in full for each of the five years: Haryana, Karnataka, Odisha, Rajasthan and Tamil Nadu, Haryana and Rajasthan have the advantage of geographic proximity to the Centre, which makes it easier to follow up with babus. Tamil Nadu is known to have above average liaison skills.”
 
Failure to disburse local body grants is Central failure as much as of states
 
The 12th Finance Commission permitted panchayats to use grants for local needs, subject to conditions. For instance, funds could be used to improve water supply and sanitation provided users paid for at least half the recurring cost.
 
The 13th Finance Commission decided to loosen such specific conditions and strengthen general accountability.
 
“Local bodies clamoured for some leeway to match resources to local needs,” said Rajaraman. “Yet, with a few exceptions, they were poor in record-keeping. So, we designed the performance-based component of local body grants, the second component.”
 
To qualify for performance grants, states were given a year to ensure local bodies kept audited books of accounts and appointed a local ombudsman for complaints. It may not have been enough time.
 
Over the five years, a quarter of performance grants were not released, increasing to 35.8 percent and 46.2 percent in the two economically troubled years. Six states did not qualify for the rural performance grant in any year and 11 did not qualify for the urban grant.
 
Lapses occurred at the Centre as well. Stopping payments to non-performing states was a violation of the terms of the 13th Finance Commission, which had said that half the money set aside for non-performing states would be divided among all states - performing as well as non-performing.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

COMMENTS

Vishal Modi

9 months ago

To whom will they be accountable to?

Public Interest Exclusive
Maheshwar Peri, Chairman of Careers360, vanquishes IIPM in court
After a long and bruising legal battle - both civil and criminal - across several states, Maheshwar Peri's dogged persistence and staying power has led a big victory for freedom of the press and will protect students who have long been misled by IIPM's advertisements in every publication. In the course of the battle, IIPM closed its many campuses and chose to withdraw all cases against Peri, when the matter reached the Supreme Court 
 
It is a big victory, not merely for Maheshwar Peri, but for all the students and parents who were lured by the fake claims of Indian Institute of Planning and Management (IIPM) and its poly-tailed, self-proclaimed economic guru Arindam Chaudhuri. IIPM’s strategy was to gag the media — sweeten large newspapers with advertisements and viciously target smaller publications with court cases filed all over India. But Maheshwar Peri, chairman and chief executive of Careers360, decided to take on Chaudhuri and IIPM and fight each of the cases filed against his publication. After IIPM lost a couple of important battles, he sought a transfer of all the cases to the Supreme Court; that is when IIPM capitulated and withdrew all the cases on 22 January 2016.
 
But even before that, a hard hitting order by the Delhi High Court had forced IIPM to shut down many of its campuses and to stop making false claims. People may recall how Arindam Chaudhuri, a big advertiser in the mainline media, puffed himself up with claims to be an economist, best-selling author (Count Your Chickens Before They Hatch), film maker (delivered a flop). He also set up events and seminars, which saw Bollywood stars (Shah Rukh Khan), top bureaucrats and politicians in attendance, enhancing his credibility and luring students to enrol for his management courses. This also allowed him to get away with the most audacious claims and actions - at one time he claimed to be setting up a campus at Boston near Harvard, to give the Ivy League university a run. He also tried to create a fake equivalence by claiming to be better than the Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs).
 
And yet, IIPM was never even recognised by either All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) or by University Grants Commission (UGC).
 
This carried on for decades while the mainstream media chose to remain silent because of his generous advertisements.  It finally took one man's willingness to brave 50 court hearings, bear the eight figure costs and intimidation to bring down the dubious empire.
 
 
Before being dragged by Peri to the Supreme Court, Chaudhuri and IIPM had lost four cases, one each in Uttarakhand High Court and Punjab & Haryana High Court and two in Delhi High Court
 
Chaudhuri and IIPM have been penalised and criticised several times by the High Courts. In September 2014, the Delhi High Court, while slapping a cost of Rs25,000 on IIPM for misleading students, restrained IIPM from publishing advertisements as a management and business institute. While IIPM and Chaudhuri had filed or fought cases till the High Court level, they surprisingly never ever challenged any order passed at this level before apex court.
 
The Delhi HC order says, “In our opinion, the aforesaid is clearly a maze created by the respondent No.4 (IIPM) to entrap students to enlist with it in the hope of acquiring a qualification which the respondent No.4 (IIPM) is not entitled to confer and thereby enriching the respondent No.4 (IIPM) to a considerable extent as is evident from the huge expenditure earlier as well as now being incurred by the respondent No.4 (IIPM) in publicity in print and electronic media.”
 
"There were two more cased pending in Guwahati. When me moved to the apex court, armed with these wins (in HCs), they probably decided not to challenge as the verdict may be adverse than the HC decision and withdrew the cases," Peri says.
 
While asking Chaudhuri to prominently display on IIPM website that they are not recognised by any statutory body or authority to offer courses, the Delhi HC Bench said, "IIPM and its management or officials including its dean Arindam Chaudhuri are restrained with immediate effect from using the word 'MBA, BBA, management course, management school, business school or B-school' in relation to the courses or programmes being conducted by them or in relation to the representations if any made to the public". 
 
In the order issued on 22 January 2016, the Supreme Court Bench of Justices Jagdish Singh Khehar and C Nagappan, said, "Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 (IIPM & Others) states, that he has been in instructed to inform this Court, that respondent nos. 1 and 2 have decided to withdraw the proceedings, which are subject matter of transfer in the present petitions. The statement made by Mr Arunabh Chowdhury, Advocate is taken on record. In view of the above, the instant transfer petitions do not survive, and these are accordingly disposed of."
 
Arindam Chaudhuri-led IIPM had filed multiple civil and criminal defamation cases against Pathfinder Publishing Pvt Ltd, the publisher of Careers360 and Maheshwer Peri, across different places. "I lost count of the number of cases I defended myself against. At one point, there were 14 matters that I was seized of at different levels, in different courts on different counts," Peri says.
 
He is reportedly have made appearance in over 50 court hearings. He says, "When we did carry the series of three articles in 2009, we never imagined the assault would be so severe. There was a case in Delhi where I along with the promoter of Outlook (his family including wife and children) were dragged in. Later the Delhi High Court struck off the names of the (Outlook) promoter and his family members. There was a case in Gurgaon where me along with my mentor (Rajesh Jain) were dragged in a criminal case. This case was challenged in the Punjab & Haryana High Court, which quashed it in September 2015." 
 
"Then there was a case in Uttarakhand where I, my editor and my wife (in her capacity as director) had bailable warrant issued against us for non-appearance. This is on a case where we never received any summons. My dear wife courageously told me that she was ok being jailed as long as she has me for company in her cell. The Uttarakhand High Court quashed this case famously saying 'The common expression in a Court room is 'Satyamev Jayate'- Truth shall triumph. Truth is also the best defence in a case of defamation. A truth spoken for public good can never be called defamatory'," he added.
 
Peri was also slapped with Rs100 crore defamation case by IIPM. He says, "This was a case in Kamrup (Assam), a civil defamation case worth Rs100 crore, which made one probable investor back-out of investing in Careers360 even without understanding the nature of the case. There was a contempt petition too in the same court."
 
In the meantime, according to Peri, Arindam Chaudhuri carried a cover story in his magazine titled 'B-School scamsters exposed", which charged Careers360 of demanding money to give ranks to B-Schools. "This cover story made multiple charges against me, my integrity and character. It called 'Careers360' a yellow journal. When I think of each of them, my blood boils. It was meant to harass us, bully us and make us submit to their whims. The article insulted us, humiliated us and meant to destroy Careers360."
 
"It had a chilling effect on every other journalist in the country. Newspapers like Indian Express fell silent after trying to take it up. Even at Outlook, one incapable administration in-charge tried to get into a 'settlement' behind my back. It all fell apart because I refused to concede my rights as Publisher of Careers360. But for a supportive boss at Outlook, friends, understanding Angels and a great mentor, Careers360 would not have survived the onslaught. It was a battle between David and Goliath. It was just that I was a determined David," Peri says.
 
According to Peri, for some time during that period, IIPM was looking out for a settlement. He sent a message to Arindam Chaudhuri. The message reads, "Arindam, Please do what is good for you. Don't do favours as I never sought them. That will help you take the right decision. I have fought your cases for 6 years and will continue to do so. I never seek favours nor am I silent when I am needed to speak up. That is my DNA. For me, this battle is long over. I am only defending myself against your false accusations. I have much work to do and you are nowhere on my radar. The battle with you is long over. If you have learnt anything in the past 5 years, I am the happiest."
 
Peri says he was clear about one thing that he will defend himself as long as the cases would go on. "The only way out was for all cases against me to be withdrawn unconditionally. The battle started in courts and must end in courts but not in board rooms," he added.
 
In December 2015, Peri along with Pathfinder Publishing filed a case in the Supreme Court accusing IIPM for abuse of judicial process and also requested transfer of all cases in the North-East before the apex court. They contended that all the parties are located in Delhi and the subject matter of the cases in Assam has been adjudicated in Delhi, Uttarakhand and Chandigarh, so it should be heard together before the SC.
 
He said, "It seems that IIPM and its promoter have become wise. They realised that the fight will lead to another adverse order, another loss. And an order from the Supreme Court can be crippling. Remember what happened to Sahara? So, on 22 January 2016, on the day of the hearing, they decided to withdraw all cases against me that were pending in Kamrup and by extension, in Guwahati High Court. I was also informed that they also withdrew all cases against Outlook pending in various Delhi courts".
 
"...after six years of exhausting battle and legal costs that ran into eight figures, closes all my battles with IIPM. Lawyers are advising me to charge them with malicious litigation. I neither have love nor hate. I am immune to any negative feelings. I am cold. It is over. And this is my last word on IIPM, for I have loads if work to do before I sleep, miles to go before I sleep," Peri concluded the note on his Facebook page.
 
Earlier in May 2014, the UGC issued a circular informing public at large and students that IIPM was not a recognised university and cannot award MBA/BBA degrees. "As per Section 22 of the UGC Act, 1956, the IIPM does not have the right to conferring or granting degrees as specified by the UGC under Section 22 (3). It is further clarified for information that IIPM is neither entitled to award MBA/ BBA. BCA degree nor it is recognised by UGC," the Commission said in an advertisement dated 18 May 2014.
 

User

COMMENTS

Joseph Korah

8 months ago

God bless you Mr. Maheshwar Peri. Though you had a very tough fight you have finally won!! By proving that IIPM was a big fraudulent Organisation you have saved the future of many students and saved them from wasting their parent's money.

J Pinto

8 months ago

Why is Arindam not in Jail for outright fraud ? Swachha Bharat should sweep away this filth from our societies.

Even in Pakistan a "software company" called Axact did the same thing and the promoter is in Jail. Of course he was exposed by the foreign press and not his own.

Leslie Menezes

9 months ago

A BIG SAUTE to Peri Jee... but it leaves the judiciary in a bad light. The judiciary needs to recognise such fraudsters and take suo moto action against them for defrauding society. One such action will prevent thousand fraudsters . IIPM may be one such case there are thousands of smaller ones who defraud the gullible

Satish Janipalli

9 months ago

Hats off to Mr. Maheshwar Peri.
Looks like he's battle weary ....if its 8 figure expense ..then someone in the stature of Mr.Maheshwar Peri's Guru should insist Mr.Maheshwar Peri to file a case ( I donot know of the Court jargon) and get the money back . It will be the final Justice to him and his Friends who stood by him .

there's a dialogue in the much acclaimed "the insider" movie ....something I remember vaguely ...."they say you put Edward R. Murrow to shame.."......same goes to the group that knowingly did not report or act or least support Mr.Maheshwar Peri. Hope I get a chance to meet Mr. Maheshwar Peri in person , to know more about his steely resolve.

TIHARwale

9 months ago

as regards the claim of Maheshwar Peri that "where we never received any summons" this happens that persons manning lower judiciary are highly compromised and many a times courts are known to entertain cheap false cases. No one can deny IIPM is a finishing school which gave confidence to many a youngsters to wear a tie and converse in English confidently

Sarala Kurup Jagan

9 months ago

Hi

Between poseurs like these and
those raising their hoods in JNU .... the indian education falters. The true educators don't stand a chance against the weeds.They spread like wild fire and eat at the roots of what should fundamentally be a mode of generating thought, questions , answers and debates.Money is just an incidental factor in the whole process.All who demean education need such Davids...may his tribe increase....

nilesh prabhu

9 months ago

Great Job, standing up to a bully.

Any one with a bit of common sense would have known that it was an unrecognized institution.

Why were the establishment silent?

manojgolikeri

9 months ago

Hats off to you, Mr Peri.

Your resilience and patience has finally paid off. Kudos to your untiring efforts in bringing the 'influential' fraudsters to book. Truly appreciated Sir.

Satyameva Jayate !!

Regards,
Manoj R Golikeri.
Jogeshwari, Mumbai.

Parimal Shah

9 months ago

Mr Peri should now lodge a case of defamation and frivolous complaint against Arindam and seek compensation of 1000 crore for the defamation through IIPM journal and mental agony through all theose cases.
-Parimal

LALIT SHAH

9 months ago

Weldon

Raja Laks

9 months ago

For someone who went through hell in Indian court, believe me even though you win the case you actually loose valuable time, money and work.

Its only advocates who ultimately win.

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)