Regarding amendment to the constitution of IRPOF - Subba Rao

To

The Secretary General,

IRPOF, NEW DELHI.                                Dated : 12-08-2013

Sir,

I understand that it is proposed to amend the constitution of IRPOF and suggestions are invited. I take privilege to offer my views on the subject, as former President of IRPOF considering it as a duty and right to express my views..

1. The entire issue of amendment to the constitution appears to have arisen only on account of a proposal to create the post of an ADVISER/PATRON.

2. If it is considered that retired officers can also be members of IRPOF, and can hold the posts such as adviser, then an exhaustive list of the retired officers on Indian Railways has to be made out which needs regular updating.

3. If a post of ADVISER or any other post is created for choosing a retired officer, then equal opportunity is to be afforded to all the retired officers and elections are to be held by calling for the nominations. This will be in all fairness and a democratic process. There are several retired officers to offer their services.

4. Constitution can be amended and posts can be created depending on the necessity and usefulness to the IRPOF and cannot be created only to accommodate some persons of choice. I am afraid, the leadership will be at the risk of attribution of motives in such nominations.

5. The retired officers, who are really interested in the federation, can make their valuable contributions from outside also to strengthen the organization with their rich past experience and not necessarily by holding any post of office and benefit/profit.

6. Such induction of retired officers is likely to create further demands of facilities and privileges to them. Can they be considered and acceded?

7. Who will be responsible for the actions of the retired officers in their working? It is always possible that the retired officers can create problems as they are no longer bound by any constraints compared to the serving officers.

8. The Railway might not accept any induction of Retired officers as ordinary members or committee members, whatever be our constitution, since the rules for recognition are very clear. We cannot also afford to send wrong signals to the Railway about bankruptcy of leadership for leading the federation by sending proposal to induct retired officers as office bearers. We cannot compare with the AIRF or NFIR about this aspect.

9. If a retired officer is given any post, he might feel it convenient to stick to it for the lifetime as in the case of other federations.

10. Our problems are many. Should we really bother about these unwanted issues to assume importance only for diversion of our time and resources?

11. The mute question needing an answer is what is the interest of retired officer to hold a post in the IRPOF after his retirement? It might be hard to conclude that it is only a service to the IRPOF.

12. From my part I am serving the federation by not interfering with its activities. I have also curtailed my attendance for any meetings in spite of gracious invitation from IRPOF (thanks to Sri Jitendra Singh and Sri J. P. Singh) as I had spent lot of personal money during my tenure as President and also after retirement to attend the meetings at personal expense which I can no longer afford. I did not have the privilege to be considered for attending the meeting at IRPOF’s expense like few other favorites. I was unable to digest the present proposal and therefore was tempted to write this, irrespective of how it is taken and not very concerned about any adverse reactions.

13. I would like to conclude that there should not be any proposal to offer any post whatsoever to any retired officer and there is no need for any amendment of the constitution about this. In fact, there should a ban on the Zonal Railways in continuing the services of retired officers under some pretext or the other. The members of IRPOF were very decisive and had totally turned down some proposals in the past to continue the General Secretary after retirement. Let better senses prevail.

Yours sincerely,

P. V. Subba Rao

Former PRESIDENT/IRPOF

PERMANENT ADDRESS:

12-13-101,(575)
Street # 3,Lane # 1,Tarnaka,
SECUNDERABAD  500017A.P. INDIA.
Ph. 040-27002128, Mo. 098490 28875.

PRESENT ADDRESS
B-1104, ADARSH RHYTHM APARTMENTS,
71, Panduranga Nagar,

Behind FORTIS HOSPITAL,
OFF Bannerughatta Road,
BENGALURU 560 076
Mo. 09849028875, 081978 37802, Ph. 080-41690587.

Regarding amendment to the Constitution of IRPOF

The Secretary General/IRPOF

New Delhi.

Pursuant upon the formation to the Constitution Amendment Committee (CAC) in

the ECM/IRPOF/ Delhi in March 2013 wherein the committee was formed as nder:- 

Shri   Amitesh Gupta, Dy.CEE/NFR

Shri   D. N. Verma  Dy.COM/ER

Shri   L. Kabilan,  SR  &

Shri   Shashi Ranjan, DFM/ECR

Here it is worthy to mention that you have deleted my name and inserted the name of Mr.V.Varadrajan in my place from the said committee under the obligation/heavy pressure of Jitendra Singh or any reason best known to you. But it is clarified that once a committee is formed by the mandate of the delegates in the ECM /AGM, you have no moral right to delete anyone’s name except with the permission of ECM/AGM

1. I hereby remind that basically the purpose for constituting the committee was the proposal made by me from the dais during my speech that the arbitrary amendment, made in the constitution in the AGM 2010 at Secunderabad, be withdrawn that had faced severe and strong  protest by many zones despite that it was forcibly imposed, for vested interest,  by flouting  and disregarding  the by-laws of sacrosanct constitution. Since then that has been being applied as a weapon to intimidate the zonal railways for extorting money in the name of Seminars, cocktail parties, bidding farewell to chosen persons and giving costly gifts for self benefit. Accordingly I made a proposal from the dais to reverse back the constitution to its previous position to maintain status quo.

2. Similarly Amitesh Gupta from NFR proposed to make an amendment for the four IInd AC passes of the Federation to be distributed in the four parts of India i.e North, South, East and West for better organization purposes, that has been being misutilized hitherto by giving it to the person of choice of Delhi area mostly. But  it is a matter of surprise that the whole idea  has been diluted and converted into a single agenda  for creating a post of advisor  for a retired officer having the sole hidden  agenda for accommodating Mr. Jitendra Singh, as if,  he only has retired and all other retirees have been pushed back in oblivion.

3. However I am fully agreed with the 13 point suggestion of Shri P. V. Subba Rao , ex. President /IRPOF who has strongly refuted and opposed the creation of any Advisor  that is an eye opener and must be followed..

MY SUGGESTION (as asked for) :­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

(1) There is no need of any advisor when so many young, talented, experienced and serving officers are already available in the system. It will be a disregard to their potentiality and interference of someone who has already availed his all 3 terms rather extended the 4th term by manipulating and deforming the constitution, more so, even after your election as Secy General he did not handover the CUG phone and Ist AC pass and continued till the last day of his retirement even by sitting in the chair. What a lust ?

(2) Why there is so much scramble and uproar for the post of advisor / patron when it was not at all needed during his entire 10 years tenure (rather an already elected advisor Mr. K. Hassan was not allowed to work and was shown the door ) and now when he himself   has retired he wants to stick and dominate over the Federation as if the existing and serving officers are incapable to run the Federation.                                              

(3) How many times and to what extent the constitution will be being amended ?

(4) Why the advice of one person only when so many seasoned, experienced and retired stalwarts are available ? If at all it is necessary then an Advisory Board may be constituted that will be a separate body from the Federation to accommodate all the retired Presidents and Secretary Generals who will give their valuable suggestions from outside.

More Important..

(5) The constitution should be reinstated/restored to its status of 2010 by removing the arbitrary and dictator like articles framed and designed by Jitendra Singh to suit his choice with the ill motive of adopting power for  restraining, removing, disaffiliating any zonal body who cannot go in any court of law and particularly gagging the mouths of Mr M.C. Yadav, Mr Y.S.Chaudhury and similar persons like him who had been exposing his corrupt practices specifically embezzlement of IRPOF fund.

(6) All the 4 IIAC passes be distributed in the four parts of India for better organizing purposes irrespective of cast, creed and region.

Hence it is the need of the time to prove yourself a better successor by restoring the previous democratic constitution, which was distorted for autocracy, as you have a long way to go and earn reputation for the Federation. Please evade the unwanted issue of “Advisor” meant for a person who has been a controversial figure during his entire period. Also concentrate on creative ideas, otherwise, not only he will be a barrier in your way rather will prove a rein for you in the day to day working of the federation. 

D. N. Verma

General Secretary/ERPOA

SAVE THE IRPOF

Dear all,

While I endorse the views expressed by Sh. Subba Rao, 100%.  I remember my words at Gorakhpur, when for the first time the question of changing constitution was raised. In fact the constitution was changed and Sh. Hasan was choosen for the same. Sh. Hasan’s name was published in the Rly Bd. Directory as Advisor and he continued to designate himself as such till he was ignored by  the then SG. He  even attended the first formal meeting as Advisor but his friends in the Rly Board. Advised him that it is not taken as correct. My saying at the meeting was that there is no need of formal Advisor, because in my view every retired person is an Advisor.

I am surprised to note  that a person responsible for denigrading the elders – who openely boasted that we don’t need any advise from old people is now instigating the people to change the constitution for nominating himself as Advisor. I don’t understand that how it can be written in the constitution for making a post for the ex. SG. During this period he saw to it that no retired person is given respect. (Except ofcourse Sh. S.K.Khanna perhaps).

First of all he did not invite at all the respected person or if he did not invite them with dignity. If at all invitation was given, it was always through letters and even that to reach to them very late knowingly. What is specifically can be said , the invitation always mentioned ‘ invited to attend open session only” not the AGM. (It was only at his farewell  that formal invitation was extended with oral invitation in advance). Do you know the unanimous decision of Sh Hasan being elected as Advisor was never advised to Railway Board and was not made a part of modified constitution.. I reveal here that there was a remark by somebody  very important person, that these old gaurds do come in the Federation office for TEA only.

After that Sh. Hasan used to spend for his meals himself and my self avoided taking tea etc. as far as possible without being terse..

I said at GKP that there is no need of formal Advisor, as that will limit the choice of SG/Federation to take advise only from one person. In fact during our times we showed the atmost respect for every retired office bearer of the Federation more that our own elders. These person who served the Federation/ general masses - in fact don’t need any post , what they actually need respect, love and affection and they will give you anything what you need in return.

You may  or may not agree with their advice  but at least give them due opportunity to give their views which will always benefit you all. We always ensured that all important elders are invited at all our meetings ,functions even at Dharnas and other protests. We gave them importance such as Chief editor of PROP or head of the constution modification or Memorandum preparation etc.etc. I am not able to express my anguise in proper words, but I am sorry to say that all our activities during last few years just indicate that we have just forgetton to reaspect our seniors and all those who have made many sacrifices to make peoples life prosperous and easy.

At the last , I am not able to understand that this vision comes to SGs at the time of their retirements or after that. Why not when the constitution was  modified many times in between .  If all the coctitution is to be modified that must be modified and only one line resolution should be there that the constition exiting before last 4-5 changes is restored.

I beg to be excused if my sentiments hurt any body, but unfortunately I cannot contain myself when I find that a fouram which can only prosper with having love, affection and respect for every senior or even junior, is being damaged.

S. K. Bansal

Former President/IRPOF

PLEASE SAVE THE INDIAN RAILWAYS

Dear Shubhranshu,

Thanks a lot for the mail. I read all the letters with great interest and agree completely with all of them. I do hope that there are a sufficient number of right-thinking Railwaymen who have the strength of conviction to stand up to injustice and manipulations.

I shall send a hard-copy of a letter that I shall draft for the attention of the Minister of Railways. For whatever it is worth, I intend also sending a copy of the letter to the PM’s office. I only hope this does not go against Mr. Virdi’s cause. I shall send you a scanned copy of the letter separately.

Thanks for responding so promptly and with kind regards,

Vinay

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Vinay,

It was nice to receive your mail. Sunil Bajpai often speaks of you and in glowing terms. He is a dear friend of mine too.

You have expressed your anguish in very powerful words. I am, however, surprised at the indifference and apathy with which most railway officers have come to accept such despicable acts. It is probably now a foregone conclusion that most top level postings will be driven by pelf and machinations, unless drastic surgery is done. Who will do it? I do not know. What exactly needs to be done? I do not know. But, I have reacted to these events and exhorted those in power to do something at great peril to my own career. I am now certain that I will be blocked in my career sooner than later. My wife, though, keeps encouraging me to fight for the cause and not to be too mindful of my career, which in any case if calls for money, will not come my way.

I am giving the links to three of my letters that I wrote in recent months/days. If you take time to read them, you will get a fairly good idea of what is wrong and what you must write in your communication to the Minister.

http://db.tt/bwOR73th

http://db.tt/eaVWmn2R

http://db.tt/T0sg9vkz

The minister will never read an email. So it would be advisable to write on paper and mail it to him. Even then, I doubt it will go past his secretary. But try we must. I also request you to be as open and frank as you have been in the mail to me and speak your mind, which I am sure you intend to do.

I shall be obliged if you email the contents of your communication just so that I find a comrade in the fight for the cause.

Thanks for writing. I feel encouraged. Mr Virdi's is a worthy cause to fight for, especially since the action against him is the sign of a deeper malaise.

Best Regards,

Shubhranshu

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 07-Sep-2013, at 6:11 PM, "SHARMA, VINAY" <V.SHARMA@AFDB.ORG> wrote:

Dear Shubhranshu,

I joined the Stores Service of the Railways in 1985 and worked briefly on Western Railway before going on deputation to Konkan Railway in January 1991 and the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation in 1998. I returned to the Railways for a brief period in 2002 before taking up an assignment with the African Development Bank (AfDB) in October 2002. I am presently posted at Tunis as the Director of the Procurement and Fiduciary Services Department of the Bank.

Sunil Bajpai is a close friend and a batchmate and it was he who gave me your mail address. I do apologise for this intrusion, but I would be grateful for your guidance on an important issue that has disturbed me profoundly in the last few days.

When the sordid events leading to the “Railgate” affair hit the press, it troubled a large number of Railway Officers as the system was shown to be able to be influenced by money and power. There was a silver lining, though- many of us hoped that this would lead to the necessary cleansing in the system and that merit and strict adherence to the principles would again drive postings at the highest levels in the Railways.

It was, therefore, with a deep sense of outrage that I learnt about the vigilance case that appears to have been resurrected and that would seek to adversely affect the career of one of the tallest officers of the Railways today. I have had the proud privilege of working with Mr. Virdi at the Lower Parel Workshops (and subsequently when I was a Senior Stores Officer at Churchgate and Mr. Virdi was the Sr. DME at the loco shed at Abu-Road) and it will indeed be a sad day for the organization if someone as principled and straight as Mr. Virdi is reduced to explaining his conduct in a seemingly minor transaction that, by all accounts, appears to be straightforward and necessary in promoting innovation. I do not know the details of the case, but from whatever I have learnt from the press, it would be tragic if the organization, at the highest level is seen to be not only not protecting its own officers from outlandish charges, but seems to be actively encouraging conspiratorial behavior.

I read the letter that you had written to the Minister of Railways and I most enthusiastically endorse it. As an ex-Railway Officer and a proud citizen of India, I believe that I have no choice but to add my voice so that a deserving officer is not denied his due- and the organization is not denied the opportunity of being led by someone who is probably our only hope of bringing order and the highest values back to the Railways. I would, therefore, like to write a letter to the Minister of Railways, but the web-site of the Ministry of Railways does not have the e-mail address of his office. I will be grateful, therefore, if you could either send me the mail address that I could send a letter to, or perhaps, if you think it appropriate, to forward this mail to the Minister’s office.

I have not spoken about this letter to Mr. Virdi, as I do not wish to embarrass him. I also believe that, principled as he is, he would perhaps feel demeaned by someone else taking up his cause. My conscience will, however, not allow me to remain silent to what I perceive is rank injustice.

I do realize that a summary closing of the vigilance case, though perfectly valid under the circumstances, would perhaps give an impression of another cover up. What could be acceptable, therefore, is a strictly time-bound enquiry (say to be completed in two weeks’ time) that would determine if there indeed was any impropriety. The enquiry should also establish if the vigilance case was resurrected for ulterior motives- and if so, demonstrable action should be taken so that vigilance does not become the tool for settling personal scores.

Thanks and kind regards,

Vinay Sharma
IRSS- 1985
Director, Procurement and Fiduciary Services Department,
African Development Bank,
Tunis, Tunisia