“I think so. Gen V K Singh is a very honourable man. The Army rests on the basis of honour and integrity…I don’t think he will compromise on honour unless he was driven to it,” he said when asked if the Army chief was forced to go to the Supreme Court on the age issue.

Gen Singh filed a petition before the Supreme Court last week challenging government’s orders which had determined his date of birth to be May 10,1950 and not May 10,1951,which would have given him an extra ten months in office.

Asked if the Army chief was justified in approaching the court on the issue,Roychowdhury said,”Yes,of course,he can. Should he have gone to court,that is an issue which has to judged on the basis of overall events.”

Best of Express Premium

Premium

Premium

Premium

Premium

“It must be examined whether the chief was placed in a position by events in the background and how long they have been going around…Can a chief be placed in certain position by turn of events,the rulings of Defence Ministry where he has no option but to go to court,” he said speaking to Karan Thapar in Devil’s Advocate programme.

Queried if it was right for a serving Army chief to have approached the court,Roychowdhury said,”If a serving major or a colonel can go to court,I don’t see why a Chief can’t go to court… He is an army person with an army persons’ rights.”

When pointed out that armies across the world were supposed to obey orders,the former Army chief said,”There are organisations that take advantage of these principles and force things on army which it does not like.”

On whether accepting 1950 as his year of birth would vitiate Gen Singh’s case,Roychowdhury said,”I would like to say that we should go into circumstances that made him declare that 1950 was his date of birth. What were the circumstances and what were the pressures put on him,we don’t know.”

He said Gen Singh Singh would have accepted 1950 as his date of birth in writing “under pressure” and dismissed suggestions that he was putting self before service on the issue.

Roychowdhury said if anything affects the career of an officer and “particularly getting the top spot,if at that juncture some person or organisation says that unless you sign this undertaking,you will not be promoted. This would bring severe pressure on him”.

He said the government should have “handled the issue in a better manner and shown more understanding… The Defence Ministry is guilty of not putting broad approach to the issue. Minister should have exercised judgement”.

The fact that two different dates of birth existed in two different branches of the Army was “appalling” and said that it should be ensured that no such cases come up in future,the former army chief said.

“Raids were also conducted at the residences of Independent candidate Pawan Kumar Dhoot in Kolkata and former Rajya Sabha member Ajay Maroo in Ranchi,” a CBI official said.

Dhoot,an industrialist,was one of the independent candidates in the countermanded Rajya Sabha elections.

The CBI could not search the house of JMM MLA Sita Soren,daughter-in-law of JMM president Shibu Soren,in Bokaro,as it was found locked.

Best of Express Premium

Premium

Premium

Premium

Premium

“We have put a seal on her residence and deployed guards there. However,we have conducted raids in her other houses,” the official said.

Thirty-six places were selected for the early morning raid by 36 teams of the premier investigation agency in Ranchi,Jamshedpur,Bokaro,Hazaribagh,Godda,Bihar’s Banka district and Giridih.

The other MLAs in whose residences raids were conducted are Sanjay Prasad Yadav,Janardhan Paswan,Sanjay Kumar Singh Yadav (all 3 of RJD),Sudha Choudhary (JDU),Ram Chandra Sahis,Umakant Razzak,Kamal Kishore Bhagat (all 3 of AJSU Party),Paulis Surin (JMM),Arun Mandal,Ramchandra Baitha (both BJP),Saurav Narayan Singh,Anant Pratap Deo,Sarafaraz Ahmed (all three Cong),the official said.

Raids were also carried out in the premises of Yakub Ali,a private citizen,he said.

On April 21,the CBI had raided the premises of three MLAs,Vishnu Bhaiyya (JMM),K N Tripathy (Congress) and Suresh Paswan of the RJD and independent candidate and industrialist R K Agarwal and his kin.

The sleuths had also seized the ballot box,which was allegedly used in the March 30 countermanded elections to the Rajya Sabha,on April 21.

The agency has registered a case under section 171F (undue influence) and 188 of the Indian Penal Code (disobedience to an order lawfully promulgated by a public servant),days after the police and the Income Tax department seized Rs 2.15 crore from a vehicle allegedly belonging to a relative of an independent candidate on the outskirts of Ranchi on the day of the poll.

The EC had conducted fresh biennial elections on May 3 for the two RS seats.

The Group of Ministers,in its meeting on Tuesday discussed issues related to providing special status to both the states under Article 371-D of the Constitution and believed to have examined a proposal to include two districts of Rayalseema in Telangana.

However,the process of finalising the report and the draft bill remained inconclusive.

“We will meet again tomorrow,” Union Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad said after the meeting,which was attended by Union Ministers A K Antony and P Chidambaram,among others. Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde heads the GoM.

Best of Express Premium

Premium

Premium

Premium

Premium

The Ministerial panel’s meeting was also attended by top officials,including National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon and Union Home Secretary Anil Goswami.

Shortly after the meeting of the GoM,a delegation of Union Ministers from Andhra Pradesh,including HRD Minister M Pallam Raju,who are opposed to the bifurcation of the state,made a presentation before Shinde opposing division of the state,as a last ditch effort to stall the process.

The GoM is expected to recommend that the draft Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill should be named as Andhra Pradesh and Telangana Bill,thus avoiding an amendment in the Constitution but allowing both the states to enjoy special status,official sources said.

Article 371-D,which was inserted through 32nd Amendment in 1973,empowers the President to issue orders from time to time providing for equitable opportunities for people belonging to different parts of the state.

This provision,which has overriding effect on other Articles of the Constitution,was brought in following agreement on a six-point formula between leaders of the state on September 21,1973.

This formula was aimed at a uniform approach for “accelerated development of the backward areas” of Andhra Pradesh,and to provide “equitable opportunities” to different areas of the state in the matter of education and employment in public services.

The proposal to reconstruct the boundaries of Telangana and include two districts of Rayalseema – Kurnool and Anantapur – as part of Telangana is believed to have been

examined by the GoM. However,sources said,it is not clear whether a final decision has been taken by the ministerial panel on it.

If this proposal is accepted,the united Andhra Pradesh would be divided equally and both the states would get 21 Lok Sabha seats each,147 seats each in the assembly and 45 seats in the legislative council.

Both Kurnool and Anantpur have proximity to Hyderabad and have a sizeable Muslim population.

However,the move is likely to be opposed by Telangana Rashtra Samiti and BJP,but may be supported by All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen and some Andhra Pradesh Congress leaders.

Even though Shinde has declared that the draft Telangana bill would be introduced in Winter Session of Parliament,uncertainly prevails as giving time frame to Andhra Pradesh Assembly to consider the Bill rests with the President.

It is the prerogative of the President to give time to the state Assembly – minimum 10 days – to return the Bill to the Centre. However,the Assembly resolution is not binding under the Constitution.

Sources said the then united Madhya Pradesh Assembly was given 40 days by the then President to consider the state bifurcation bill when Chhattisgarh was carved out.

If the President gives more than 15 days to the state Assembly to consider the proposal,the Centre will not be in a position to table the bifurcation bill in the Winter Session,which comes to an end on December 20.

Sources said in that case,the possibility of convening a special session of Parliament cannot be ruled out.

They said the last meeting of the GoM will be held on Wednesday to finalise the draft Bill.

The issue of Hyderabad continues to be contentious as Seemandhra leaders are demanding protection of lives and property of Seemandhra people settled in Hyderabad after the bifurcation.

One of the options,the GoM may suggest,is handing over law and order responsibility and revenue department to the central government under a special provision of the Constitution.

The GoM had held a series of meetings with leaders of eight political parties,Union ministers from Andhra Pradesh and Chief Minister N Kiran Kumar Reddy and officials in the past one month.

During these meetings,opinion has been given on distribution of assets and other issues between the new state and the residuary state of Andhra Pradesh.

Once the Cabinet clears the proposal,it will go to the President who in turn will refer it to Andhra Pradesh Assembly for approval. However,the Assembly resolution is not binding under the Constitution.

The Union Cabinet then can consider the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill and with Union Cabinet’s approval,it will send it to the President before being tabled in Parliament.