New Delhi: A Delhi Assembly committee on Thursday decided to submit a report on irregularities observed in the Delhi Nagrik Sehkari Bank Ltd to House Speaker Ram Niwas Goel after “repeated summons” to bureaucrats over the issue.
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Saurabh Bharadwaj, who heads the Questions and Reference Committee, during the proceeding of the panel said that in 2017, former Chief Secretary M.M. Kutty was notified to appear before the high court to answer some questions in the matter and inform about the action taken in the case.
“The then Chief Secretary had evaded appearing before the committee by seeking a stay from the court,” Bharadwaj told Deputy Speaker Rakhi Birla during the meeting.
He alleged that current Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash, Secretary-cum-Registrar of the Department of Cooperative Society (RCS), J.B. Singh and former RCS Shurbir Singh did not appear before the committee “despite repeated summons”.
“The report suggests that these officers were acting in connivance with a group of former directors of the cooperative bank,” Bharadwaj said
“The report should now be submitted to the Speaker. It has been three years (of AAP government in Delhi). The rest two years will also be over but no action would be taken against the accused if the report is not taken forward,” he added.
The Nagrik Sehkari Bank is accused of issuing fraudulent loans worth Rs 100 crore through forged documents and spending lakhs on “laddoos” during Diwali.
The case of fraudulent loans first came to light in 2013, when members of the bank reportedly filed a complaint with the Registrar of Cooperative Societies alleging fraudulent loans in connivance with the directors.
Earlier in the day, the Delhi High Court directed the committee not to insist that Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash should appear before it and said that the panel’s move to issue a notice to the top bureaucrat seemed an attempt to circumvent the process of law.
The panel said that even if Prakash does not appear before the committee, “at least the rest should but they don’t”.
The committee also said that the notices of leave sent by various officers were received “only an hour before the proceedings”.