Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Lok Sabha Debates

State Banks (Repeal And Amendment) Bill,2017. on 10 August, 2017

Sixteenth Loksabha an> Title: State Banks (Repeal And Amendment) Bill,2017.

HON. CHAIRPERSON: The House shall now take up Item No. 50.

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANACE (SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR GANGWAR): I beg to move:

“That the Bill to repeal the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959, the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956 and further to amend the State Bank of India Act, 1955,  be taken into consideration. ”             Sir, I would request that the Bill be passed.  यह एक बहुत ही छोटा-सा बिल है।

HON. CHAIRPERSON: Motion moved:

“That the Bill to repeal the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959, the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956 and further to amend the State Bank of India Act, 1955,  be taken into consideration. ”   SHRI S.P. MUDDAHANUME GOWDA (TUMKUR): Thank you, Sir.  At the outset, I would say that we are not opposed to the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill, 2017.

          The reason for the acquisition of the subsidiary banks, as assigned by the hon. Minister, is the improved productivity and customer service.  This is the reason mentioned in the Statement of Object and Reasons of the amendment Bill.  For whose service and productivity this merger is taking place?

          Sir, more than seventy per cent of the Indian population lives in the rural areas. An ordinary citizen, including a poor farmer and the last person of the society, should feel comfortable to enter any commercial bank. But, what was the position? Why the most historic and revolutionary decision of nationalising the banks took place on 19th July, 1969 when Indiraji was the Prime Minister of this country? Sir, the exact reason behind such a revolutionary and a historic decision by late Indiraji was that the ordinary and the last person of the society were not allowed to enter in a commercial or nationalised bank. He was not feeling comfortable with any commercial bank. Agriculture was not at all considered as one of the areas where the banks are supposed to give credit to the farmers. That was the rationale behind taking a drastic decision to nationalise the banks by late Indiraji.

          Sir, in the year 1969, only 8,261 rural branches were there in this country. Prior to 1969, more than 70 per cent of the population lived in the rural areas and more than 70 per cent of the people of this country were dependent either on agriculture or agricultural operations. But, still the number of branches, earlier to 1969, in which this nationalisation of banks took place, was only 8,261. But, after the nationalisation of the banks, by the year 2000, the number of branches in the rural areas went up to 65,521. Shrimati Indiraji wanted to shift the banks which were mainly concentrated in the city areas, to the rural areas to enable the common man or the agriculturalists to obtain the benefit and facilities from the nationalised banks. That was the reason behind it. But, what is the feeling now? Of course, by merging the subsidiary banks, the State Bank of India is now feeling as a big brother. At least, the State Bank of Mysore, which was in existence in Karnataka, had a lot of branches in the rural areas. People used to feel that the State Bank of Mysore was their bank. A lot of agricultural and subsidiary crop loans were given to the farmers by the State Bank of Mysore. But, by merging that bank with the State Bank of India, the people of this country, particularly the rural people, are feeling that there is some infringement of their rights in terms of getting loans from the nationalised banks. It has become a big bank. Now, only the corporate sector and the bigwigs are capable of entering this bank. The common man will now feel that the State Bank of India is not his bank. That is the feeling.

          Sir, I now come to NPAs. What is the level of NPA in the State Bank of India? There are Rs. 1.8 lakh crore of NPAs in the State Bank of India. At the end of December, 2016 … (Interruptions) It is the information furnished to me by the Reference Wing. If it is Rs.96,000 crore, it is well and good. You are short of Rs.10,000 crores.  

HON. CHAIRPERSON: Please address the Chair.

SHRI S.P. MUDDAHANUME GOWDA : Sir, Rs. 1.8 lakh crore of NPAs are there in the State Bank of India. I think it would be appropriate to quote Shri Venkaiah Naidu, the incumbent Vice-President, who as a Minister made a statement that big people are responsible for higher NPAs and not poor people. That was the statement he made. Everyone feels that NPAs are not only in SBI, but it is there in all commercial banks and it is a big sum of money which has gone waste and it is at the cost of the poor people that this amount is growing.

          In addition to this, the State Bank of India is imposing some stringent conditions on customers. Nearly 31 crore people are being affected by the decision taken by the State of India with regard to keeping a minimum balance in the saving accounts. Nearly 31 crore people of this country are going to be affected by this stringent action by the State Bank of India. How can a bank impose a condition on a poor farmer who is having an account with the State Bank of India in a rural branch to have a minimum balance in his savings account? Otherwise, penalty would be imposed. This is a very bad decision. How can we call this entire system as people-friendly? Furthermore, the bank proposes to impose charges for cash withdrawal and also service charges. All these decisions are anti-poor. These decisions are not in favour of the poor people of this country. We must feel in this country that the banks are meant for the common people. One should feel comfortable while entering the bank. But by imposition of these stringent rules like imposing service charges and keeping a minimum balance in savings account makes a common man very uncomfortable. Earlier minimum balance was Rs. 500 and now it has been increased to Rs. 1000.

          Sir, I would like to draw the attention of the Government to the fact that people in this country, particularly the farmers are in a very critical condition. On the one hand, there is excessive rain in Northern India and on the other there is no rain in Southern India. I was listening to the speeches made by my colleagues here that because of heavy floods in the North-Eastern region, and Northern India including the States of Gujarat and Rajasthan, people are facing a lot of problems. The State of Karnataka is reeling under drought for the last five to six years. There are a lot of water tanks in the State. For the last 15 years I have not seen that these small tanks in the State of Karnataka are being filled with water and the consequential effect is that there is depletion of underground water. In addition to this, there is a lot of problem even to get drinking water. This is the situation.

          Sir, finally, the suicide by farmers has assumed alarming proportions in this country. For the last several days farmers from one State are sitting on a dharna here. Not only that, consistently there has been an increase in the suicide by farmers. The Government of Karnataka took a revolutionary decision of waiving off the loan of the farmers to the tune of Rs. 8261 crore.

HON. CHAIRPERSON: Shri Gowda, please conclude now. 

SHRI S.P. MUDDAHANUME GOWDA:   The Government of Karnataka under the leadership of the Chief Minister, Shri Siddaramaiah, has waived off  loans of farmers upto an amount of Rs. 50,000 in the cooperative sector.   My friends in the Treasury Benches insisted on waiving off farmers loans.  They assured us in the State that they are going to get the farmers loans in the commercial banks waived off through the Government of India.

Now, using this opportunity, I would urge upon the Government of India to waive off farmers loans in the commercial banks so as to enable the farmers to breathe peacefully at least for sometime, to prevent farmers suicides in the country and give an assurance to the farmers that they can also lead a respectable life in this country.

                                                                                                  

SHRI SHIVKUMAR UDASI (HAVERI):  Sir, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill, 2017.

          It seeks to repeal the two Acts, the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 and State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956 and further to amend the SBI Act, 1955. These Acts established the State Bank of Bikaner, the State Bank of Mysore, State Bank of Patiala, State Bank of Travancore and State Bank of Hyderabad.  These Banks were subsidiaries of the State Bank of India.

          The Union Cabinet granted its approval in February, 2017 which allowed the SBI to acquire the subsidiaries, and the SBI Act, 1955 is getting further amended right now. This Bill seeks to amend SBI, Act 1955 to remove the references related to Subsidiary Banks .  These references include the definition of a Subsidiary Bank in the 1955 Act and powers of SBI to act as an agent of the RBI for a Subsidiary Bank.

          As was asked by my elderly colleague, Shri Muddahanume Gowda, what was the reason for which the merger has been done?  The reason for the merger is like this. The guiding principle for the consolidation process of banking in India has so far been as per the Narasimhan Committee recommendations according to which the move towards the restructured organization of the banking system should be market driven based, on profitability consideration and brought about through process of mergers and amalgamations. 

As far as merger of  banks is concerned, any initiative with respect to merger of public sector banks has to come from the Board of the bank concerned, the extant legal framework keeping in view the synergies and the benefits of the merger and their commercial judgement.

          He also categorically stated the Objects and Reasons for which acquisitions were agreed upon.  For the purposes of rationalization of resources, reduction of costs, better profitability, lower cost of funds leading to better rate of interest for public at large, improved productivity and customer service, SBI, with the sanction of the Central Government, is now having a consolidation for which these consequential amendments are required. Hence the Government of India has taken a call and after this acquisition of Subsidiary Banks, the SBI and the Subsidiary Banks cease to exist and therefore, it is necessary to repeal the SBI (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1955 and State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956. Five associates and Bhartiya Mahila Bank become the part of the SBI from 1st April, 2017 making it the country’s largest lender among the top 50 banks in the world. 

          Following the merger, total customer base of the SBI has increased to the tune of 40 crores with a branch network of 24,000 and nearly 59,000 ATMs across the country.  Merged entity began with the deposit base of more than Rs. 26 lakh crore and advance to the level of Rs. 18.5 lakh crore.  Number of staff has been to the tune of 2.83 lakhs.   SBI has become the largest commercial bank in India in terms of assets, deposits, branches, customers and employees.  It has 199 offices in 37 countries across the world in all the time zones as on April, 2017.  It will be one of the largest banks in the world right now in terms of assets and clients…(Interruptions)

          With this it enters the league of top 50 global banks. Its market share has increased from 17 to 22 per cent.  Having made this significant investment in technology, SBI is in a position to offer the widest portfolio of digital products and services. Thanks to the merger, additional customers will access and benefit through these products. The larger branches and the ATM networks will enable the SBI to offer its products and services seamlessly across India to its varied customers besides being easily accessible.

          After the acquisition of all the subsidiaries or the associated banks by the SBI, it is not necessary to retain such provisions in the SBI Act, 1955. Therefore, certain amendments are necessary in the said Act. Insofar as they relate to the subsidiary banks, amendments are consequential in nature. Furthermore, the recent merger of five associated banks with the SBI is hailed as path breaking measure. Three of the associated banks were stock-listed entities in which the SBI has the dominant holdings, while the remaining two were wholly owned by it.

          If you go back and see the history of the SBI, known once as the seven sisters, the associated banks had been established by the princely States before the country’s Independence to serve the local population. These came under the fold of the SBI after the Government passed the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act in 1959.  Thus the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur which was a merger of banks belonging to two princely States, Bikaner and Jaipur, came into being as SBI subsidiary in 1963. The Bank of Indore, originally established by the Maharaja of Indore, Holkar, in 1920, became State Bank of Indore. The Bank set up by the princely State of Bhavnagar in 1902 became the State Bank of Saurashtra. The last one, Hyderabad Nizam’s Bank set up in 1941 was renamed as State Bank of Hyderabad. Like-wise the banking outfits of the erstwhile princely States in Patiala, Travancore and Mysore became the SBI subsidiaries.

          The Narasimham Committee had envisaged in 1991 that the SBI should progressively merge all the seven subsidiaries with itself. It was recommended long back in 1991. The Narasimham Committee has given a report recommending consolidation or merger of the associated banks. Long thereafter, in 2008, the State Bank of Saurashtra was the first to merge with the SBI. Two years later, the State Bank of Indore was integrated. The Government issued a directive in 2016 asking the SBI to complete the merger of the remaining five associated banks by March. … (Interruptions)

श्री निशिकान्त दुबे (गोड्डा) :  2008के बाद क्या इन्होंने कुछ नहीं किया?

श्री शिवकुमार उदासि : 2008के बाद इन्होंने भी करना था,मगर वे कर नहीं पाये।

          Narendra Modi’s Government did it.  Shri Muddahanume Gowda, you have to appreciate that. It has been done under the visionary leadership of hon. Prime Minister Narendra Modi ji.

          First, the associated banks had enjoyed a common identity with the SBI for long. They had shared the SBI’s logo, highly visible point of customer recall and rallying point for group affinity.  Second, the SBI had been exercising the tight operational control of the associated banks from inception. The SBI Chairman was presiding over the individual Boards of the associated banks which were run by the top executives of the SBI who were sent on deputation.  As a result, the banking products, operational systems, core banking system, procedure and norms of the business were all common, Third, all associated banks were operating under the same Information Technology platform like the SBI. Since the time the SBI launched massive computerization in the mid 1990s to automate all branches, it had included the associated banks in the same exercise. In 2002, it had engaged Tata Consultancy Services to roll out a core banking solution covering the entire group. So, the associated banks were beneficiaries of the common code and the linkages. Fourth, the treasury operations of the associated banks had been integrated with the SBI for several years. This has provided valuable expertise to them, cost advantage and fund mobilization.  

          Lastly, the major loan decisions of the Associated Banks used to be vetted first by the SBI under centralised control before the proposals received local approval at the concerned associated Banks’ Board. This oversight had added a valuable layer and helped steer the asset portfolios of   the Associated Banks on generally prudential lines.

          Now, I would come to the point, which my hon. Colleague has raised.   It was hon. Mrs. Indira Gandhi, who  had taken a call and initiated the process of nationalism of banks in our country. But I would like to remind him that till this date, no ordinary man could enter into a bank… (Interruptions)

          Let me tell you that in the last Government also, ‘zero balance accounts’ were  opened but there were no transactions in those accounts. But after Narendra Modiji had given a call, 29.5  crore  Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Accounts had been opened and Rs. 65,000 crore have been deposited in these banks.… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON : Hon. Members, let him speak.  Please do not disturb.

… (Interruptions)

DR. A. SAMPATH (ATTINGAL): Sir… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON:  He is not yielding. 

… (Interruptions)

SHRI SHIVKUMAR UDASI : He made a categorical point that the SBI is going to charge for maintenance of accounts… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON: Dr. Sampath, he is not yielding.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI SHIVKUMAR UDASI : Hon. Chairman, Sir, I need your protection… (Interruptions)

          In the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Accounts, there is no restriction or thereis no penalty for not maintaining a minimum balance… (Interruptions)

          In the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Accounts, Rs. 65,000 crore have been deposited by the people of this country, the rural population of this country… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON: Shri Udasi, you please continue your speech.

… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON:  Hon. Members, please do not disturb.

… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON: Nothing will go on record except the speech of Shri Udasi.

…(Interruptions)*…   HON. CHAIRPERSON:  Shri Udasi, you continue speaking.

… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON: Dr. Sampath, it is not proper.  You may speak when your turn comes.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI SHIVKUMAR UDASI : Sir, consolidation in the banking sector is the need of the hour… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON:  Nothing will go on record except the speech of Shri Udasi.

…(Interruptions) *…   SHRI SHIVKUMAR UDASI : Sir, consolidation in the banking sector is the need of the hour.  Capital Adequacy Ratio for many Public Sector Banks, especially the smaller ones have been steadily declining mainly due to higher provisioning requirements for poor asst quality, Basel III Capital Norms and additional capital required to cover additional risk areas under the RBI’s risk-based supervision framework. (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON: Dr. Sampath, I am requesting you to  take your seat.

… (Interruptions)

HON. CHAIRPERSON: He is not yielding.

SHRI SHIVKUMAR UDASI : The poor valuations of the bank stocks, especially the PSBs are not helping matters either as raising resources from the capital market poses challenges. When the best performing PSBs have been hesitant to tap the market for augmenting their capital level, it would be very difficult for the weaker PSBs to raise resources from the market.  It is also not possible for the Government to always step in with capital infusion into the banks due to budgetary constraints.

          Against this backdrop, consolidation in the banking sector assumes  significance and a certain criticality with a view to salvaging the smaller and weaker PSBs. This process will not only help provide capital adequacy as per International Norms and Accounting Standards but also enable better overheads management from a cost perspective.   Consolidation will thus make our banks stronger and more vibrant in the emerging competitive scenario with greater clientele synergy.  On the human resource side, it will provide a larger pool of talent to tap into for ensuring better corporate governance.  It becomes imperative now, particularly, when we look at the sagging balance-sheets of some of the PSBs who are tottering on the brink with steeply declining profitability.  It has become unsustainable for them.

          For this reason, the consolidation and merger are happening in this country for the Public Sector Banks under the recommendation   of the Narasimham Committee.

          Sir, I am supporting this Bill.  By taking this opportunity, here, I would like to draw the attention of the hon. Finance Minister. We have a total of  1,30,000 bank branches in this country, which is one of the highest in the world.  The next is Columbia, which has around 95,000 bank branches.  Then comes  China, which has 94,000 bank branches.

There are two and a half lakh Panchayats in this country. There are above six lakh villages in this country.  I would like to request our Government to open more bank branches in the rural areas as Shri Muddahanumegowda ji was referring so that each Panchayat would have ultra small branches or 'brick and mortar' branches to serve the purpose of rural economy or to spur the rural economy. It is because we all see that 29.5 crore new accounts have been added.  There are operational hassles in the rural branches. … (Interruptions)

          The BC Model, which was brought by the former UPA Government, was inoperable. You can see that there are around one and a half lakh Business Correspondents in this country.  Due to lack of network, they are inoperable.  

Therefore, my humble suggestion to the Ministry would be to open ‘brick and mortar’ ultra micro branches where there will be four or five employers who can cater to the needs of the rural economy.  By doing this, we can help the poor farmers of this country. Out of 13 crore farmers, only four and a half crore farmers are availing of loans from the public sector banks and the commercial banks.  My suggestion would be that in the name of financial inclusion, which we have started now, we have to give loan to the marginal and the small farmers. If the Government can do something on this front, it will be appreciated.

          With these few words, I support the Bill and conclude my speech.

          Thank you very much.

 

SHRI C. GOPALAKRISHNAN (NILGIRIS): Sir, I express my gratitude to my beloved leader Puratchi Thalaivi Amma before I participate in the discussion on the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill, 2017.

This Bill seeks to repeal the two Acts: (i) the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959, and (ii) the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956. These Acts established the State Bank of Bikaner, State Bank of Mysore, State Bank of Patiala, State Bank of Travancore, and State Bank of Hyderabad. These banks were subsidiaries of the State Bank of India (SBI). This is consequent to the Union Cabinet granting its approval in February 2017, which allowed the SBI to acquire these subsidiaries. After the acquisition of the subsidiary banks by the SBI, the subsidiary banks have ceased to exist and, therefore, it was necessary to repeal the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 and the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956.

In the Statement of Objects and Reasons it was stated that with the sanction of the Central Government and in consultation with the RBI, the SBI entered into negotiations with the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, State Bank of Mysore, State Bank or Patiala, State Bank of Travancore and the State Bank of Hyderabad for acquiring business, including assets and liabilities.

The State Bank of India (SBI) had decided to merge the five associate banks from 1st April, 2017, and has decided to shut down almost half the offices of these banks, including the Head Offices of three of them. This process was started from April 24.

Out of the five Head Offices of the associate banks, they have decided to retain only two. Three Head Offices of the associate banks were closed along with 27 zonal offices, 81 regional offices and 11 network offices of the associate banks. The five associate banks that will merge with SBI are: the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, the State Bank of Mysore, the State Bank of Travancore, the State Bank of Patiala and the State Bank of Hyderabad.

SBI is India's largest bank with assets of Rs. 30.72 lakh crore and figures at no. 64 in the global ranking of banks (as of December 2015). Post-merger, with assets of approximately Rs. 40 lakh crore, it will be among the top 50 banks in the world. It was said that the five associate banks will cease to exist as legal entities and will become a part of SBI from April 1, but the various merger processes had started only after April 24, once the balance sheets of the five entities are audited and added. Now the repeal Bill comes with an aim of repealing the old Acts.

Global rating agency Moody’s, in its report last month, said the merger will have limited impact on SBI’s credit metrics, given that SBI already fully owns SBH and SBP and has majority stakes in the other three associate banks.

This is the first ever large-scale consolidation in the Indian banking industry. The merger will create a banking behemoth with an asset book value of Rs 37 lakh crore. SBI will give 28 of its shares for every 10 shares held of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur. It will give 22 of its shares for every 10 shares held of State Bank of Mysore. The lender will give 22 of its own shares for every 10 shares held of State Bank of Travancore.

Sir, there are five things which will be significant in this merger.  One is asset quality. By virtue of being the country's largest lender, the SBI is bound to have bad loans on its books. However, despite being much smaller in size, the associate banks, too, have accumulated large amounts of bad loans. When the entities are merged, these bad loans will become a part of one bank. Consolidation would help in better dealing with these accounts as there are a number of common accounts among these banks.

Second is profitability.  Typically a merger among banks negatively impacts the profitability of the combined entity due to various transition issues. Associate banks such as State Bank of Travancore and State Bank of Mysore have already reported losses in the December quarter owing to the asset quality concerns on their books.

Third is technology. While SBI has been at the forefront in adopting new front-end and back-end technologies to be competitive in the market, some of the associate banks are still behind in these regards. SBI has an active information technology department that works on a number of innovative solutions for the bank. After the merger, the rollout of all these solutions will have to take place on a much larger scale, adding to the cost of making this technology available to customers.

HON. CHAIRPERSON : Your time is up.  Please conclude.

SHRI C. GOPALAKRISHNAN : Sir, before I conclude, I wish to urge upon the Government to provide adequate compensation and benefits to the employees of the associate banks who may either opt for VRS or wish to continue to serve in SBI. And I also urge upon the Government to continue the services provided by these associate banks to the people of the country.

Thank you, Sir.

   

PROF. SAUGATA ROY (DUM DUM): Sir, I rise to speak on the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill.  This Bill will legalise the acquisition of five Banks, namely, the State Bank of Patiala, the State Bank of Mysore, the State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, the State Bank of Travancore, and the State Bank of Hyderabad by the State Bank of India.  The Hyderabad Bank came into existence under a separate law.  That is why a separate amendment for State Bank of Hyderabad is necessary.  These banks have already been acquired.  So, we are actually doing an ex post facto action of things which have already been done. 

          I rise to say that I am not opposed to the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill.  I started my life as a Probationary Officer in the State Bank and worked there for 2 ½ years.  My learned colleague, Shri Prasun Banerjee worked for 33 years in the State Bank.  He got pension, but he is still not being given free medical facilities which he should be given.  Now, having said that, why I do not support the Bill wholesale is due to three questions which I will pose before you.

          Three questions are troubling the minds of the people in the country. My first question is this.  Who gave 44 votes to …*? Nobody knows but there is a speculation in every newspaper on this.

SHRI ANURAG SINGH THAKUR(HAMIRPUR): Dada, that is the margin. …(Interruptions)

PROF. SAUGATA ROY: The second question is this. You should accept defeat gracefully. Anurag Ji, you are an up-and-coming leader.  You must know how to accept defeat gracefully. …(Interruptions) यह बड़ी बात नहीं है,जीत तो गया है।...(व्यवधान)श्री दुबे जी क्या आपने एक सिनेमा देखा है?...(व्यवधान)सर,आप जरा कंट्रोल कीजिए।...(व्यवधान)

 (Hon. Deputy Speaker in the Chair) HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Members, do not divert the attention of Prof. Saugata Roy.

PROF. SAUGATA ROY(DUM DUM): Hon. Deputy Speaker Sir, please control the House. It is all in your hands. …(Interruptions) I saw a cinema long time ago. It was called "जो जीता,वही सिकन्दर’,इसे सभी लोगों को मान लेना चाहिए।...(व्यवधान)

          My second question is: how much money was deposited after demonetization till now?  How much money has been deposited in the State Bank of India?  I have put this question to the Reserve Bank of India Governor. If Arun Jaitley Ji has been here, I would have asked him. He has deputed... *. So, let him at least speak on this issue.

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: How do you know about all those things?

…(Interruptions)

SHRI NISHIKANT DUBEY: He is assuming something …(Interruptions).

 PROF. SAUGATA ROY: Notification is there. …(Interruptions).

          The third question that I have about State Bank of India is simple. Why did the Chairman of the State Bank of India go to Australia during the Prime Minister’s visit to finalize a proposal so that … * could get a loan for the Australian Coalfield?

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Name will not go on record.

…(Interruptions).

PROF. SAUGATA ROY: Let me modify my statement. Listen to me and then apply your judicial decision. …(Interruptions).Why did the SBI Chairman travel to Australia during the Prime Minister’s visit to finalize the loan for a coalmine for a Gujarat based corporate? …(Interruptions). Is that alright Sir?

          Now, let me oppose some of the anti-people decisions of the State Bank of India.  I told you that I used to work for the State Bank of India. We called it the biggest bank for the smallest man.  Now, it seems that the SBI is bent upon harming the common man.  What did it do?  You may also be affected Sir.  Your account is there in SBI, Parliament House.

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  How do you know that I am having an account? Is it your duty to know about my accounts?

PROF. SAUGATA ROY: All salaries are deposited in that account. The savings bank interest rate was four per cent. Now, it has been reduced to 3.5 per cent.  This is an anti-people decision.

          Then, let me mention some more anti-people decisions. Earlier, the minimum balance for a savings bank account without cheque facility was Rs.1,000 across the country. Now, the minimum balance for the metro branches will be Rs.5,000.  

 

          The penalty for non-maintenance of minimum balance will be between Rs.50 and Rs.100. For urban and semi-urban branches, the MAB, Minimum Account Balance, is fixed at Rs.3,000 and Rs.2,000 respectively. In case of rural branches, the minimum balance has been fixed at Rs.1,000.

          Sir, the Government speaks of the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana. They say JAM trinity, that is, Jan Dhan, Aadhar and Mobile. जन धन योजना में आपने इंट्रेस्ट कम किया है,मिनिमम बैलेंस ज्यादा किया है।  Is it not against the interest of the common people? I want to ask this question. Where is the State Bank of India going to?

Also, coming to ATM charges, we all take out money from the ATM. Those who use the SBI’s mobile wallet will now be charged Rs.25 per transaction. After four withdrawals in a month, a service charge of Rs.50 plus service tax per transaction will be applicable for basic Savings Bank Deposit Account. This step by the State Bank of India will harm altogether 31 crore people. Also, coming to IMPS fund transfer charges through Internet banking--they say we want ‘Digital India’—the Internet banking charges will be Rs.5 plus service tax for amounts up to Rs.1 lakh, Rs.15 plus service tax above Rs.1 lakh and up to Rs.2 lakh, and Rs.25 plus service tax for amounts above Rs.2 lakh and up to Rs.5 lakh. These are totally anti-people decisions.

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please conclude.

 

PROF. SAUGATA ROY : I will end up. It is because of Shri Anurag Singh Thakur and Shri Nishikant Dubey, I am asking for two more minutes. They disturbed me. Please do not take away my precious time. You give me two more minutes and I will finish it.

          I want to say that at this stage, the State Bank of India is having the biggest NPA, Non-Performing Asset. The Non-Performing Asset of the State Bank of India is Rs.97,000 crore. Taking every bank together, the State Banks of Bikaner and Jaipur, Hyderabad, Mysore, Patiala and Travancore, it comes to Rs.1,40,000 crore. The bank is being badly managed and the Government has no reply. It is constantly issuing directives to merge them and they say we will make it one of the top banks of the world. If you compare it with the Citibank and even if you compare it with the ANZ Grindlays Bank, can you come up to that level of service?

          We are only hoodwinking the common people just by showing, we have done a big thing; we have merged all the banks into one. What is there? Rather, the people will get late service. All the Members from Kerala are here. In Kerala, there was an agitation against the merger of the State Bank of Travancore…(Interruptions)

          You see, Sir, they are supporting me because of what happened in Kerala. They have said this is essential for rationalization and all that. Now what will happen? The number of branches will be reduced. So if there is a branch of the State Bank of Travancore, it will be closed down and the SBI branch will be kept open. How much trouble is being created? Kerala is a densely populated State. How much will they do rationalization of resources and reduction of costs, and bring better profitability at the cost of the smallest banks? And they will call themselves the biggest banks for the smallest man. That is why, I have no moral support for this Bill.

We could have opposed the Bill. We could have given Resolutions and amendments but that is quite pointless. This Government, with its brute majority, will bulldoze the Bill in the Lok Sabha. We hope that our friends in the Upper House do put a brake to their coming forward.

With those words, I end my speech. Thank you.

                                                                                       

SHRI TATHAGATA SATPATHY (DHENKANAL): Sir, I rise to speak on the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill, 2017 and I oppose this Bill.

          I think it is a misfortune if you tend to be in this House present for too long because when you see the sides changing and the support for each other, it confuses the image. I remember when the revered colleagues were sitting on the opposition side, how they used to oppose something which the UPA was saying. Now, when the hon. colleague from the Congress side spoke, his very first sentence was, “I support this”. I will revert why it has support from both the sides.

          The idea, of course, has been spelt out. Five smaller banks – State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, State Bank of Mysore, State Bank of Patiala, State Bank of Travancore and State Bank of Hyderabad – are being merged with the big ocean called the State Bank of India. The Government has already put it into effect. We are only doing a post-mortem and putting our stamp on it.

          It is a clear move to hide the immense amount of non-performing assets that these banks have accumulated over the years. This seems to be a stopgap arrangement to prevent these five smaller banks from collapsing inwards.

          Let us take a quick look at the financial status of these five banks before this merger. The State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur had a 71.94 per cent decline in its net profit for December 2016 quarter and its gross NPA was at 15.5 per cent. The State Bank of Hyderabad incurred a loss of Rs.2760 crore as of March 2017 with gross NPA at 20.7 per cent. The State Bank of Travancore had incurred a loss of Rs.2152 crore and the gross NPA stood at 16.8 per cent. In case of State Bank of Patiala, they had a bigger peg at Rs.3579 crore loss and the gross NPA stood at 23.1 per cent. Last but not least, the State Bank of Mysore with a loss of Rs.2006 crore is the worst of the lot that showed a gross NPA of 25.7 per cent, that is about one-fourth of all the loans given out by that bank as bad loans. These NPAs are rising constantly.

          Given the horrible situation that exists today, by merging the smaller banks with the larger bank, you are trying to hide the bad performance of the banks. Then, whom you are merging them with, you are merging them with the State Bank of India, which itself has a 6.9 per cent gross NPA and you think that the State Bank will rescue these banks.

          Let us recollect that the Chairman of SBI had asked for a bail out package to save the telecom sector on June 1, 2017. We know that one company, I am not taking any names, was flagged by 10 banks as a defaulter of Rs.42,000 crore. If a small villager defaults in a repayment of Rs.7000, you go and you do ghoro korakh, that is, auction of his home and land. We call it korakh. I do not know what Hindi speakers call it. If that is what the common man is facing, how the country is being run or walked or crawled by these two sides is for everybody to see.  This is the dark side of the moon. How to go forward? We cannot always be negative like these two people.

          Employees, who were supposed to do due diligence and locate genuine loanees had consciously defaulted. They, from the chairmen of the banks to the bank managers, to the assessors of the bank, all have connived at some point or the other to give out bad loans, whether it is to big corporations or to companies or corporates. As long as you do not take action against them, let us be very sure that even today, Sir, on 10th of August, 2017 as you sit in that Chair and as we are all talking about it today here, bad loans are being created because the same people are still working in those same banks. Unless you take corrective action, it will be there. There are people who have worked in banks and minted millions, not from their known sources of income, and they sit with hefty sums as pensions. Not all bank employees are crooks; I am saying some are.  Similarly, there are some employees today who are conniving with crooked companies, crooked corporates to loot the country, to loot the poor man’s wealth. When you are merging these five banks, you are also taking that crooked staff into the State Bank of India. You are also continuing paying salary to those people.

           My positive suggestion to the Government would be that a time has come – instead of blaming the Congress and the Congress supporting you – when you have to weed out the corrupt and the inefficient from the system. If your banks collapse and if there is no official retribution, the scenario will never change. Again, five years later, you will be trying to merge the SBI, if they are there in power or whoever is there – with ANZ Grindlays or some other bank.

          Sir, punishment today can be the sole deterrent for any wrong that might happen henceforth. So, let us take steps to create a situation where we do not tax the tax-payers even more into paying for the faults of these politicians, these bureaucrats and these bank employees. I am dreading a day when all these coal-fired power production units declare themselves to be NPAs. What is going to happen to this country? That will, again, be billions of dollars worth of loans which will go bad.

          Sir, I started with why the Congress supported, but I missed that point. Why did the Congress support? I remember – Sir, you were in the House at that time – when Mr. P. Chidambaram was the then UPA Finance Minister. He had told the House that they want to create few big banks by merging the smaller banks so that these will be so-called global banks. That was a name that he had coined. Little did we know that the system from inside was totally rotten. What they had discovered because of their bad management and bad governance, these people have also discovered it because of their bad management and bad governance. You are continuing the same process and you are trying to cover up the same ills. … (Interruptions)

          Sir, let us come to the bigger picture. I will take two more minutes. You are claiming that ‘we have created a situation of only white money because we did demonetisation.’ I am not going to ask how did you fund those MLA candidates in UP elections, how did you ...*  .  Those are not my concerns. The people of India will decide who is honest and who is not. But what have you done by demonetisation? You have taken out the small amounts of cash that the poor man used to keep at home to fall back on in times of emergency. You have robbed the poor man.

          Today, you are claiming that Jan Dhan zero-balance account has given us Rs. 52,000 crore or Rs. 54,000 crore. Whose money is that? That is not BJP’s money. That is no Minister’s or no Government’s money. It is the poor man who had deposited Rs. 2,000, Rs. 5,000 or Rs. 7,000. You have collected it and taken away. Instead of giving Rs. 15 lakh, you have taken away his money. Now, if these banks fail, there will be no recourse for this country, there will be no recourse for the poor man.

          Sir, before I wind-up, I would like to say one more sentence. In brief, as I see it today, the future is dark because both the Congress and the BJP are two sides of the same coin. I pray that the people of this country realise as to where these people are leading us; what destruction they are creating; and how dark the future of this country is? Thank you, Sir.

 

SHRI ANANDRAO ADSUL (AMRAVATI): Deputy-Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill, 2017.

          The acquisition and amalgamation is the need of the day. I do not know as to why the various subsidiaries of the State Bank were there, but there was the State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur, State Bank of Mysore, State Bank of Patiala, State Bank of Travancore and State Bank of Hyderabad. In 1995, there were four subsidiaries as mentioned here, namely, State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur, State Bank of Mysore, State Bank of Patiala and State Bank of Travancore. In 1959, the State Bank of Hyderabad was established, but it was also taken as subsidiary by passing a special Amendment in 1959. Ultimately, the Board of the State Bank of India passed the Resolution for acquisition of various subsidiaries of the State Bank and their amalgamation into the State Bank of India. As a result of this merger all the assets and liabilities will be taken over by the State Bank of India.

What will happen after the merger? There are four points, which we will achieve, namely, rationalization of resources; reduction in the cost; better profitability; lower cost of funds, ultimately, leading to better rate in interest to public at large; and improve productivity and consumer services. These are the main objectives behind this acquisition by the State Bank of India and merger of all the above mentioned subsidiaries into the State Bank of India.

The question that remains to be asked here is this. Why were all these subsidiaries established in the past, that is, in 1995 and 1959? The objective definitely shows that it was done in the interest of public at large of this country. I can understand it, but if you go through the last amendment of the Banking Regulation Act where I have spoken at length regarding the whole banking industry, then it would be known that there are various types of banks like public sector banks, private sector banks, multi-State cooperative banks, foreign banks and urban banks.

The State Bank of India is having its own existence for India as they are having a number of branches in the country. This Bank is called a Government Bank. Further, the State Bank of India is having many of their branches in so many countries. Definitely we are proud of it. Our SBI is having its existence in 50-59 countries. This is the largest bank not only in India but also in many other small countries. SBI is functioning on behalf of the Government. It is also called as Treasury Bank. That is the reason why it has spread like anything. It is serving not only the common man but also big corporates. We have seen the rise of NPAs in the public sector banks but not in SBI. When we take into consideration employment, SBI has employed all categories of people in their staff in large numbers. This is also a plus point of SBI. Keeping aside the functioning of other banks, we appreciate the working style of SBI.

          That is why, the new move of the Government, the amendment to the State Banks  (Repeal & Development) Bill, 2017, is very much essential. That is why, I extend full support to this Bill. Thank you very much.

 

DR. BOORA NARSAIAH GOUD (BHONGIR): Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to speak on the State Banks  (Repeal & Development) Bill, 2017 as it also concerns the State Bank of Hyderabad, from which place I hail. Incidentally, today is the 10th August - State Bank of Hyderabad was started on the 8th August, 1941, 76 years ago. Yesterday, we celebrated the Quit India Movement, we took aSankalp. It used to be once Hyderabad State Bank because it belonged then to the Princely State of Hyderabad. Then, it was converted into State Bank of Hyderabad. Now, we would be missing State Bank of Hyderabad once it merges with SBI. To be frank, it is like a marriage registration. Marriage is already over on 31st March, 2017 when the existence of State Bank of Hyderabad expired and when it merged with SBI.

I wish to bring to the notice of the august House this. What is the purpose of merging? My learned and senior friend, Shri Satpathy has said that many of the subsidiary banks had relatively higher NPAs – 16 per cent to almost 25 per cent in the case of Mysore Bank. Is the purpose of the merging somehow to safeguard the subsidiary banks? Or as stated by other learned Members, is it to make SBI into the league of the top 50 banks in the world? Because one of the stated objectives of the Government seems to be to create a bigger bank so that we get good rankings or great ratings from the credit agencies of the world. In a way, we are feeling, bigger is better. Previously, we used to think of decentralisation, now we are thinking of centralisation.

Today, the picture of a bank is bad loans, which is because of big people. No loans are given to the small people. There is also non-accountability aspect.  Look at the bank loans which have been sanctioned to Kingfisher companies. Persons who are responsible to assess the viability of those projects are not touched. 

So, there is absolutely no accountability. I will give you an example. There are District Lead Banks. I am talking about one district in the State of Telangana. The credit limit of that district is Rs.6,365 crore. They have crossed that limit. They have disbursed Rs.6,750 crore. What is the priority lending that they are supposed to give? They are supposed to give Rs.4,250 crore as a priority lending in the rural sector for farmers, fishermen, barber and so  on. Do you know as to how much they have disbursed? They have disbursed only Rs.511 crore for the priority lending sector whereas they have disbursed the maximum amount of loan to the bigger people. Are we going to cure this disease by merging these banks with the State Bank of India? The issue is whether we talk of the Government of India or the Government of Telangana or the Tamil Nadu Government or for that matter any Government, all Governments would request the State Bank of India or the bank of the respective State to harness the priority lending. But, nobody listens to it. I wish the Government should take into account this aspect which is exactly affecting the poor people. They are forced to take the loan from the private lenders by paying higher rate of interest. That is the reason why, the number of suicides are running into lakhs across India. It is because of non-availability of the loan from the public sector banks. Is there a cure for this problem with the Government? We want to know about it from the hon. Minister.

          The Government has gone into various pros and cons of the issue by having this merger like, reduction of the NPA, technical efficiency, international standards and so on. My only concern is this. Are we going to miss this local flavour by merging it? Are we going to miss the regional focus of the bank? For example, the State Bank of Hyderabad has a focus in the Telangana State; Andhra Bank has a focus in the Andhra State; the State Bank of Travancore has a focus in Kerala. Are we going to lose the local focus? We have to be extremely careful about it. If the State Bank of India is going to have its focus only in New Delhi or Mumbai, the financial Capital of the country, in that case, States are going to lose. I want the Government of India to take up the issue.

          Before I conclude, I wish to bring to your notice one issue which is relevant to the subject. I am a doctor by profession. There are many banks near my place and they are ready to give me a loan. I have never defaulted. I pay a lot of income-tax maybe around Rs.40 lakhs to Rs.50 lakhs per annum as tax. Recently, I wanted a loan. I have never defaulted. I was shocked to hear from the bank that my credit worthiness is not there as I have become a politician. Is it a correct thing? You are discriminating a person on the ground of profession. They say that now the politicians, police and advocates are not eligible for loans. I would like to know whether any politician has defaulted in paying back the loan. I do not think anybody has done it. We have got a loan of Rs.1.00 loan, Rs.10 lakh loan and so on. We get the defaulters in loan repayment from these categories. But, they get loans. If you ask a loan of Rs. 10,000 crore, you would get it easily. But, if you ask for a loan of Rs.10,000, you will never get. This malady has to stop. I hope that this malady will be put an end to by merging all the subsidiary banks into a single bank. With this statement, I support the Bill. We wholeheartedly wish that this merger will result in a better future for the smaller people.

                  

SHRI N.K. PREMACHANDRAN (KOLLAM): Sir, it is a matter of privilege… (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is not just politician. He has mentioned about others also like lawyers and so on. It is all right.

          Shrimati P.K. Teacher.

SHRIMATI P.K. SHREEMATHI TEACHER (KANNUR): I oppose the Bill and earlier also, we opposed the Bill because this Bill never helped the people. It is anti-people, anti-farmer and it is against the parents of lakhs of students. So, we opposed the Bill.

          The State Bank of Travancore is known as Kerala Bank. Without any consultation and without any consideration, the Government of India decided to merge the State of Bank of Travancore into the State Bank of India.

          Sir, here so many hon. Members spoke about the implications of this merger. I do not want to elaborate or speak those ideas again. But, what is the result after the merger? In the last so many months, approvals were very much delayed. The delays have pushed many customers to leave the State Bank and queue up in front of private sector banks. Sir, associate banks used to control additional small value in non-performing assets through vigorous follow-up. Now, the newly merged State Bank is showing huge increase in NPA and is pushing small borrowers to courts for recovery. This is pushing many customers to private banks or private financers. Sir, this Bill is not only anti-people but also anti-employees and anti-officers.

          The merger of two associate banks into the State Bank of India had taken place in 2008 and 2010. In addition to the Provident Fund, the employees of the merged associate banks (State Bank of Saurashtra and State Bank of Indore) were given pension as third benefit, as exist in SBI. However, the same benefit which was given to the employees of the State Bank of Saurashtra and the State Bank of Indore in 2008 and 2010 respectively, was denied to the employees of five associate banks merged in 2017. The management of SBI advised the employees to exercise the option to either opting for SBI’s retirement benefits or associate bank’s retirement benefits. However, this was done without clarifying or giving details of the benefits available to those who opt for SBI’s retirement benefits which were different from what are being given to SBI employees. Although, the SBI employees and associate bank employees are recruited through the same recruitment process, the employees are treated differently even after it has become one entity. This is highly deplorable.

          Instead of hand-holding associate bank employees, they are being isolated pointing out various shortcomings. Presently, one-fourth of the employees of SBI are from erstwhile associate banks. However, SBI has done precious little to equalise the benefits being handed out to them. Now, the Union of Association of the employees of erstwhile association banks have approached the hon. High Court to get equal benefits. The Bank has still not taken any decision and this has created anxiety among the associate bank employees.

          This year’s promotion exercise has clearly indicated that there is no scope of promotion for erstwhile association bank employees. In addition to reducing seniority by two years for top-management aspirants, the Bank has totally sidelined the eligible officers of associate banks in the promotion list announced. No one from the associate banks is promoted to CGM and GM grades and very few of them get promotion to other grades. This has pushed many associate banks employees in a state of depression and dissatisfaction. Then whom is the Bill going to help? It is not going to help the employees; it is not going to help the people; it is not going to help farmers. Why has the Government brought this kind of Bill in the House? With these words, I conclude.

SHRIMATI BUTTA RENUKA (KURNOOL): Hon. Deputy Speaker, I thank you for  giving  me  an  opportunity  to  speak  on  this  important  subject  aimed at the creation of mega banks which will become globally competitive.

          I welcome this legislation which is aimed at repealing certain Acts relating to the State Bank of India and its erstwhile associate banks.  With the merger of these banks, the Acts relating to erstwhile subsidiaries have become redundant and the State Bank of India Act requires certain modifications and those are being carried out through this legislation.

          A few years back, India went ahead with the economic programme that small is beautiful and encouraged small and medium enterprises. A number of institutions were created to promote small scale industries, co-operative institutions, handlooms etc. However, over the years, it is realized that the small and medium level institutions are not globally competitive and they are also not economically viable. We have seen that state financial corporations, industrial development corporations have not been performing well in recent years as they are not being competitive with the commercial banks. Similarly, our commercial banks are not globally comparable and not able to compete in the global economy.

          In addition to this, all the banks perform the same kind of work and it is duplication and replication of functions. With the computerization of the banking industry, physical location of a bank branch is not an important requirement. So many banks having so many branches is mere duplication and waste of human and other financial resources.

          Though it is slightly delayed, this Government has taken the right step in merging the State Bank of India and its associate banks. I request this Government to further identify and merge the banks and bring down the number to a reasonable level and make them competitive in the global market.  In any case, we frequently witness merger of private banks for commercial reasons.

          I request  this Government that in the process of merger, we must ensure that none of the stakeholders like depositors, borrowers, and employees of the banks shall be adversely impacted.  In fact, we must aim at the betterment of their position.

          There have been persistent demands from the retired employees of public sector banks that they are discriminated in the pension rules when compared to their counterparts in the Government service.  There is no revision of pension whenever there is a wage revision for bank employees. Now that the pension is not compulsory and there is no addition to the pensioners, slowly the number of pensioners is dwindling.  I would request the Government to sympathetically consider the demands of bank pensioners.

          Non-Performing Assets of commercial banks, especially public sector banks, have reached unacceptably high levels. Soon after liberalization of the economy, many private sector banks have come up. In this competitive environment, banks have started canvassing loans and some have compromised on the credit quality. Some sectors like power, steel etc. have not performed well for reasons beyond the control of promoters and lenders. This has resulted in the piling up of Non-Performing Assets with the banks. Some corporates are also responsible for this mess due to diversion of funds and lack of financial discipline. Tackling this menace is an urgent need as the integrity of the financial system is in jeopardy.

          I congratulate this Government for making a law suitably amending the Banking Regulation Act. Since we are creating mega banks it is necessary to have the suitable regulatory framework so that these banks do not slip out of control and put in proper systems in place so that they function according to the objectives for which they were created.

          I appreciate the sincerity and commitment of this Government for coming out with various initiatives for strengthening the financial systems.

          With these observations, I strongly support this Bill for passing and look forward to similar enactments which will strengthen our financial system. Thank you.

SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY (BAHARAMPUR): Sir, I would like to dwell on the legislative document under the title, State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill, 2017.

          The Bill per se is not contradictory to the concept of bank rationalisation but the way the Government is trying to project itself as if the consolidation of banks will be acting as a panacea for all financial ills is the only point to which I take a serious exception.

          In the wake of the foreign exchange crisis in the year 1991, the Narasimham Committee had recommended restructuring of banks but what is the rationality right now for the consolidation of banks? Even so, the Government had decided it earlier in the year 2016, and after doing everything else, the Government is now trying to project itself gracious enough to bring this legislation in this House. They have already decided to merge the five subsidiaries and thereafter they have brought in this House a legislation to get it approved by the House. So, I think, this is nothing but to seriously erode the parliamentary authority of the country. The Government should correct itself in the future.

          मैं गंगवार जी से यह पूछना चाहता हूं कि आप बताइए कि आप जो एस.बी.आई. की बात कर रहे हैं, इसकी तो अभी 37 लाख करोड़ रुपये की सारी ऐसेट हो जाएगी। लेकिन आप ये 37 लाख करोड़ रुपये लेकर दुनिया को यह बताएंंगे कि देखो हम दुनिया में 50 के अंदर एक हो गए। आप जिस सब्सिडरी की बात कर रहे हैं, उस सब्सिडरी की ऐसेट क्वालिटी क्या थी? एस.बी.आई. की खुद ऐसेट क्वालिटी क्या है? आप कंसोलिडेट कीजिए, इसमें कोई हर्ज नहीं है। लेकिन कंसोलिडेशन करने का समय तय करना चाहिए कि वह कब हो, कैसे हो? आप पहले बैंक की सेहत को री-स्टोर कीजिए, उसके बाद आप कंसोलिडेट कीजिए तो अच्छा लगेगा। क्योंकि हर कंसोलिडेशन के पीछे कोई स्टैटेटिक रीज़न होता है।...(व्यवधान) जैसे कि मैं आपका ध्यान आकऐाऩण करने के लिए कह रहा हूं।

          A consolidation could be done for a strategic reason which is to get new geography, new segment, new talent, or new market. So, you can consolidate or merge depending on commercial and business reasons. What are the commercial perspectives or what are the business reasons which have propelled you to get the five subsidiaries consolidated?

I know that you are trying to drumbeat the success of the NDA Government without any rhyme or reason.  इसकी वजह यह है कि आप जो पांच सब्सिडियरीज ले रहे हैं,इनका मैनेजमैन्ट एस.बी.आई. के साथ था,इनका सारा इंफ्रास्ट्रक्चर एस.बी.आई. का था। इन सारे बैंकों से जो लोन दिया जाता था,उसकी वैटिंग एस.बी.आई. करता था। इसकी इंफॉर्मेशन एंंड टैक्नोलोजी एस.बी.आई. की थी। फिर आप हिंदुस्तान के आम लोगों के लिए इस तरीके से सब्सिडियरीज बैंक को कंसोलिडेट करने के दौरान कौन सी नई चीज ला रहे हैं। क्योंकि 1959 में पार्लियामैन्ट के एक्ट के द्वारा यह हुआ था,लेकिन आप पार्लियामैन्ट को अंधेरे में रखकर बाहर-बाहर सारे काम कर रहे हैं। इसलिए हमें आपका विरोध करना पड़ता है,क्योंकि आप जिस तरीके से यूफोरिया मचा रहे हैं,असलियत में वह इसमें दिखाई नहीं दे रहा है। इस सदन में भी इसका जिक्र हुआ है कि हिंदुस्तान की किसी कारपोरेट लॉबी एस.बी.आई. को एक मिल्किंग काऊ की तरह,जिस तरह गाय दूध देती है,इसे दूध वाली गाय की तरह इस्तेमाल कर रहे हैं। लेकिन गाय से दूध तब निकलता है,जब गाय का पोऐाण ठीक से होता है। आप अगर बिना पोऐाण गाय से दूध निकालते जाओगे तो गाय की हालत वैसी ही होगी,जैसी कि हमारे ...*  इसलिए मैं पूछ रहा हूं कि जब आप गुजरात के किसी कारपोरेट वाले को आस्ट्रेलिया में जाकर कहते हैं कि इसको कोयला खदान के लिए पैसा चाहिए और जब दूसरे बैंक इसके लिए इनकार करते हैं तो एस.बी.आई. उन्हें हां करता है,इसके पीछे राज क्या है?...(व्यवधान)कोई एक कारपोरेट सैक्टर है,जिसका 72 हजार करोड़ रुपये एन.पी.ए. है। आप उन्हें माफ कर रहे हैं...(व्यवधान)

                  

SHRI NISHIKANT DUBEY : Sir, I am on a point of order under Rule 353.… (Interruptions)

          It says:

“No allegation of a defamatory or incriminatory nature shall be made by a Member against any person unless the Member has given adequate advance notice to the Speaker and also to the Minister concerned so that the Minister may be able to make an investigation into the matter for the purpose of a reply. ”             यह गुजरात की बात कर रहे हैं,गुजरात के कारपोरेट की बात कर रहे हैं,आस्ट्रेलिया की बात कर रहे हैं। इन्होंने कोई भी नोटिस नहीं दिया है और इस तरह से यह सरकार के ऊपर जो आरोप लगा रहे हैं,यदि यह पहले से नोटिस दे देते तो मंत्री जी उसका प्रोपर जवाब देते। इसीलिए इनकी जो बातें हैं,उन्हें एक्सपंज कर देना चाहिए,रूल 353 के आधार पर इन्हें एक्सपंज करना चाहिए। ...(व्यवधान)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, there is no point of order.  He is making a general complaint.

 

श्री अभिऐाॊक सिंह (राजनंदगांव) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, आपने इस महत्वपूर्ण बिल पर मुझे बोलने का मौका दिया, इसके लिए मैं आपको धन्यवाद देता हूं। यह बिल स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया से संबंधित है और इस बिल के तहत जो राज्यों में पांच बैंक्स थे, उनका मर्जर हुआ है। यदि उसके महत्व को समझना है तो हमें एस.बी.आई. के इतिहास की ओर देखना पड़ेगा। स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया की शुरूआत 1806 में बैंक ऑफ कैलकटा के नाम से हुई थी। बाद में इसका नाम बदलकर बैंक ऑफ बंगाल रखा गया। उसके बाद सन् 1921 में दो अन्य प्रेसिडेंसी बैंक्स का अमलगमेशन होने के बाद इम्पीरियल बैंक की स्थापना हुई। उसके बाद 1955 में इंडिपेंडेंस के बाद जो इम्पीरियल बैंक ऑफ इंडिया था, वह स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के नाम पर उसका नामांकरण हुआ और सरकार ने उसको ओन किया।

          महोदय, भारत की आजादी के पहले से लेकर वर्तमान तक इस देश की अर्थव्यवस्था के महत्वपूर्ण बदलाव का साक्षी है और न सिर्फ साक्षी बल्कि एक महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका स्टेट बैंक  ऑफ इंडिया ने निभाई है। इस देश की आजादी के पहले अधिकांश राज्यों में प्रिंसली स्टेट बैंक्स मौजूद थे और अपने-अपने राज्य में, उनके व्यापार में उनकी एक महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका हुआ करती थी। देश की आजादी के बाद इस बात पर विचार हुआ कि कैसे इन प्रिंसली स्टेट बैंक्स को भारतीय अर्थव्यवस्था के भारतीय बैंकिंग सिस्टम में जोड़ा जाए। उसके बाद यह निर्णय हुआ कि जो प्रिंसली स्टेट बैंक्स हैं,जो अलग-अलग राज्यों में एक महत्वपूर्ण रोल अदा कर रहे हैं,उन राज्यों की भौगोलिक और आर्थिक स्थितियों की भी जानकारी है,उन राज्यों के कल्चर से भी,उन राज्यों के लोगों से भी उनका जुड़ाव है तो उस समय इसे मर्ज न कर के सब्सिडरी बैंक के रूप में स्थापित करने का निर्णय हुआ और पार्लियामेंट में सन् 1959 में यह बिल पास हुआ। उसके बाद लगातार कई बार इस विऐाय पर विचार होते गए। सन् 1990 के दशक में नरसिंहमन कमेटी ने यह रिपोर्ट दी कि भारत की बैंकिंग सिस्टम पर तीन टियर के स्ट्रक्चर होने चाहिए। उन्होंने यह रिक्मेंड किया कि तीन बड़े ग्लोबल बैंक्स,आठ से दस नैशनल बैंक्स और कई रीजनल बैंक्स तीन टीयर में भारतीय बैंकिंग सिस्टम को रखना चाहिए। लेकिन सन् 1991 में इस कमेटी की रिपोर्ट के बाद सन् 2008 तक इस कमेटी की रिपोर्ट पर चर्चा तो होती रही,लेकिन कोई निर्णय नहीं हो पाया। सन् 2008 में स्टेट बैंक ऑफ सौराऐट्र,सन् 2010 में स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंदौर का मर्जर स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इण्डिया में हुआ। 

          महोदय,सन् 2008 में स्टेट बैंक ऑफ सौराऐट्र और सन् 2017 में इन पांच बैंकों का मर्जर हुआ और इस बीच में हमारे देश में अंतर्राऐट्रीय जगत में बहुत महत्वपूर्ण बदलाव हुए। चाहे हम सन् 2008 की सब-प्राइम क्राइसिस की बात करें,जिसने एक तरीके से न सिर्फ अमेरीका की,बल्कि पूरे विश्व की अर्थव्यवस्था को हिला कर रख दिया था। इस सब-प्राइम की क्राइसिस की मूल वजह यह थी कि अमेरीका के जो फाइनेंशियल इंस्टिटय़ुशंस थे,उनका फेल्योर था। पिछले एक दशक में यूरोप और ब्रिटेन के एग्ज़िट होने की जो लगातार संभावनाएंं और इनसर्टिनिटी बनी हुई थी,चाइना का स्लोडाउन,कहीं न कहीं पूरी दुनिया की डिमांड को प्रभावित कर रहा था। ऐसे समय पर सबसे ज्यादा असर भारत के इंफ्रास्ट्रक्चर के सैक्टर पर,स्टील के सैक्टर पर और पॉवर के सैक्टर पर लगातार नकारात्मक प्रभाव पड़ा। एक ओर जहां हमारी कंपनियां डिमांड की कमी की होने की वजह से नुकसान में गईं,वहीं दूसरी ओर इन कंपनियों को लोन देने वाले बैंकों की लोन की रिकवरी पर फर्क पड़ा। इसी प्रभाव को हम लोग ट्विन बैलेंस इश्यु,ट्विन बैलेंस शीट प्रॉब्लम के नाम से भी जानते हैं।

          महोदय,इस पूरी व्यवस्था में यदि भारत की अर्थव्यवस्था पर नज़र डालें तो शायद सबसे बड़ा नुकसान पब्लिक सैक्टर बैंक्स को झेलना पड़ा है। कहीं न कहीं इसके पीछे यह भी तर्क है कि पब्लिक सैक्टर बैंक्स की प्रायोरिटी यह थी कि इस ग्लोबल अर्थव्यवस्था में,स्लो डाउन के समय,भारत की अर्थव्यवस्था पर गति लाने के लिए,इंफ्रास्ट्रक्चर से जुड़े प्रोजेक्ट्स को ज्यादा आगे बढ़ाया गया।    

          महोदय,यह जो पांच बैंकों का मर्जर हुआ है,यह पूरे विश्व में अपने आप में अनप्रिसिडेंटिड है। हालांकि इसके विरोध में,जितने भी विचार और तर्क दिए जाते हैं,उनको मैं तीन भागों में देखता हूँ। एक है जो इन बैंकों के मर्जर के बाद होने वाली एसबीआई की प्रॉफिटिबिलिटी के ऊपर। दूसरा है,बहुत सारे कर्मचारी,लगभग 70 हज़ार कर्मचारी एसबीआई में इंटिग्रेट हुए हैं। एसबीआई के कर्मचारियों की जो कुल संख्या थी,उसका एक तिहाई है,उनका क्या होगा,उसको ले कर है। तीसरा,प्रॉफिटिबिलिटी को ले कर है।

          महोदय,सबसे बड़ी बात तो यह है यह मर्जर न हो कर अपने आप में एक रीऑर्गनाइज़ेशन था,क्योंकि एसबीआई के पास इन सभी बैंकों की ज्यादातर स्टेक होल्डिंग पहले से मौजूद थी। कई सदस्यों ने यह सवाल किया है कि इसके पीछे का तर्क क्या था। मैं सरल भाऐाा में सिर्फ यह कहना चाहता हूँ कि यदि एक लोक सभा क्षेत्र में,एक पार्टी के तीन लोग खड़े हो जाते हैं तो उस पार्टी के वोट बंट जाते हैं। कई जगहों पर यह हुआ कि स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इण्डिया और जो स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंदौर हो गया या जो पांच बैंक्स मर्ज हुए थे,उनकी ब्रांचिस डुप्लिकेशन ऑफ रिसोर्ससिज़ के आधार पर देखी जा रही थीं। इसके अलावा पहले ही कई सदस्यों ने कहा है कि कॉमन आइडेंटिटी,कॉमन लोगो,सेम टैक्नोलॉजी प्लेटफॉर्म,सेम ट्रेशरी ऑपरेशंस,ये सारी चीज़ें ऐसी थीं,जो एक इनहैरेंट सिनर्जी की ओर इशारा कर रही थीं। तीसरा और जो सबसे महत्वपूर्ण पहलू है,उस पर मैं आपको कहना चाहता हूँ कि सन् 2016 के डाटा के आधार पर जब यह तुलना की गई कि एसबीआई और जो उसके पांच जो सब्सिडरी बैंक्स थे,उसके होम लोन,कार लोन और पर्सनल लोन में क्या अंतर था?यह पाया गया कि एस.बी.आई. जो मदर ब्राँच है,उसके होम लोन सबसे कम दाम पर थे,बजाय मैसूर के या अन्य बैंक की ब्राँचेज के और इसलिए कहीं न कहीं इस मर्जर के बाद सबसे ज्यादा फायदा इस देश को कंज्यूमर को होने वाला है,जिससे एक बड़े बैंक में कम इन्टरेस्ट पर उसको लोन मिलने की सम्भावना बढ़ जाती है।

         

          महोदय,इस देश के और इस दुनिया के परिदृश्य में बैंकिंग सिस्टम में तेजी से बदलाव आते जा रहे हैं। आने वाला समय ब्रिक और मोर्टर बैंक के बजाय डिजिटल बैंकिंग की ओर भी इशारा कर रहा है,लेकिन उसके बावजूद जिस राज्य से में आता हूँ,उस राज्य का एक बड़ा हिस्सा ऐसा है,जो ट्राइबल क्षेत्र है,नक्सल प्रभावित क्षेत्र है। वहाँ आज भी कुछ गाँव ऐसे हैं,जहाँ के लोगों को बैंकिंग की फैसेलिटी लेने के लिए 30-40 किलोमीटर जाना पड़ता है। मैं इस बिल का स्वागत करते हुए आदरणीय मंत्री जी के सामने यह बात रखना चाहता हूँ कि उन सभी ग्रामीण क्षेत्रों में,जहाँ बहुत दूरस्थ अंचलों में लोगों को अपनी बैंकिंग सर्विसेज के लिए जाना पड़ता है,वहाँ निश्चित रूप से एस.बी.आई. की नई ब्राँचेज खुलवायें। बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद।

 

DR. RAVINDRA BABU (AMALAPURAM): Hon. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to participate in the discussion on this Bill. On behalf of Telugu Desam Party and on behalf of my beloved leader Shri Chandrababu Naidu, we fully support this Bill.

          With the provisions of the Bill coming into effect, the smaller banks would get merged and become a single bank and would definitely get the credibility which is required. Whenever we talk about banks in India, usually we come across a common acronym `NPA’ – Non-performing Assets. The banks which are getting merged with the bank and the mother bank to which these smaller banks are getting merged, all are suffering from one disorder and that is NPA. Now, the provisions of this Bill seek to cure the symptoms of NPA by bringing about a merger of banks that are suffering from a lot of NPA. 

          Instead of treating the symptoms I would like to urge upon the Ministry of Finance to identify the disease itself. What is causing these NPAs for the banks? We are traditionally being told and we also traditionally understand, as told by the hon. Minister of Finance, it is the infrastructure sector, the steel industry and the power industry which are mainly causing NPA to banks. Directly or indirectly, for the NPAs being caused in these sectors, China is responsible. In most of these sectors that is responsible for maximum NPA, we find the common enemy is China. What should be done?

          Sir, we have the anti-dumping mechanism in place. There are other mechanisms also in place, like there are tariff barriers, there are non-tariff barriers. Above all, we have the provisions of the anti-dumping duty. That should have been invoked long back so that the NPAs would not have been caused to the level that we are faced with now. Furthermore, whenever we talk about NPAs, we talk about the people and brand them as villains. But I have also seen a lot of industrialists, a lot of businessmen and traders whose industrial and business ventures failed and they committed suicide. These are also people who contributed substantially to the Exchequer by means of both direct and indirect taxes. But owing to certain factors beyond their control, because of some extraneous factors, they succumbed to the pressure. So, when an asset becomes non-performing, I have seen a lot of industrialists and businessmen worth their name who have either committed suicide or have become lunatics. Therefore, we should also have some sympathy towards those people instead of labelling them as anti-nationals and criminals. Let us also understand as to how this is caused. The provisions of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Code will help solve this problem which is intended to redress the issue of NPAs in India. Let us hope that the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Code will go a long way in solving the problem of the NPAs in this country. Paradoxically though, the State of India is also having a lot of NPAs and this bank is adopting those banks which are already sick with NPAs. If the parents who are adopting the children are sick themselves, then the sickness is likely to double. It is not going to stop the disorder.

It is going to double. Therefore, the health of the family should be improved by taking care of the disease per se and not just redressing the symptoms.

Let us diagnose that instead of always blaming China as a villain. Let us also reform our own internal issues and look into how economic lopsidedness is giving rise to this type of NPAs.  We have a lot of political things like loan waivers and others.  Let us address all those things in the interest of the nation.

          We fully support this Bill, Sir.

                                                                                       

श्री प्रेम सिंह चन्दूमाजरा (आनंदपुर साहिब) : डिप्टी स्पीकर साहब,मैं ‘स्टेट बैंक्स (रिपील एण्ड अमेंडमेंट)बिल, 2017’ पर चर्चा करने के लिए खड़ा हुआ हूं। पहले तो मैं इस बिल का स्वागत करता हूं। मैं समझता हूं कि इसकी जरूरत थी क्योंकि जब एस.बी.आई. के एसोसिएट्स बैंकों का पहले ही मर्ज़र हो चुका है तो स्टेट बैंक ऑफ हैदराबाद का भी मर्ज़र जरूरी था। यह अलग बात है,पर अगर हम इतिहास देखें तो जब प्रिंसली स्टेट्स का मर्ज़र हुआ था,उस समय भी हैदराबाद का मर्ज़र सबसे बाद में हुआ था। इसलिए आज इसकी जरूरत थी और जो किया गया है,मैं समझता हूं कि वह बहुत स्वागत-योग्य है।

          डिप्टी स्पीकर साहब,जब बैंकिंग सिस्टम की चर्चा होती है तो इसमें जो कमियां हैं,उनकी चर्चा भी सामने आती है। मैं समझता हूं कि आज देश में यह इकोनॉमी के लिए एक महत्वपूर्ण सेक्टर है और इसको देखते हुए यह दुख भी होता है कि देश की आज़ादी के 65 वऐाऩ पूरे होने के बाद भी देश की 50 प्रतिशत से ज्यादा आबादी बैंकिंग सिस्टम के साथ नहीं जुड़ पाई थीं। मैं माननीय प्रधान मंत्री श्री नरेद्र मोदी जी को बधाई देना चाहता हूं,जिन्होंने ‘प्रधानमंत्री जन-धन योजना’लाकर देश के मैक्सिमम हिस्से को बैंकिंग सिस्टम के साथ जोड़ा और उससे हमारी इकोनॉमिक डेवलपमेंट में हिस्सेदारी बढ़ी।

          मैं कहना चाहता हूं कि जो बैंकिंग सिस्टम है और जहां तक इसकी कमी की बात है,जिसमें एन.पी.ए. की बात है और बैड लोन्स की बात है तो भले ही हमारे वित्त मंत्री जी ने एक डिस्कशन में कहा कि ज्यादातर जो एन.पी.ए. बढ़ा,उसका कारण ग्लोबल रिसेशन है और अन्य कुछ कम्पीटिटीव कारण हैं,पर मैं समझता हूं कि उसका जो दूसरा कारण है,उसे छिपाकर नहीं रखना चाहिए। कई ऐसे बैड लोन्स हुए,जिनकी जरूरत नहीं थी,जो किसी प्रेशर के कारण हुए,जो किसी विशेऐा लाभ लेने के लिए हुए। उनको आइडैंटिफाई करना चाहिए। एन.पी.ए. का भी वर्गीकरण होना चाहिए कि वे किस कारण से हुए। जैसा माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी ने बताया,उसे तो देखा जा सकता है,वे एग्जेम्प्ट हो सकते हैं। पर,जो जान-बूझ कर किए गए,उसकी तो रिकवरी होनी चाहिए,नहीं तो फिर जो लोग पैसा खा गए,वे खा गए। इसलिए बैंकिंग सिस्टम को मज़बूत करने के लिए इसके ये दो हिस्से जरूर बनने चाहिए।

          दूसरी बात यह है कि पिछले वऐााॉ में जो प्रायॉरिटी सेक्टर था,अगर माननीय वित्त मंत्री जी लोनिंग का सर्वे करें तो जो प्रायॉरिटी सेक्टर है,उसमें 40 परसेंट लोनिंग हुई और जो नॉन-प्रायॉरिटी सेक्टर है,उसमें 60 परसेंट लोनिंग हुई। प्रायॉरिटी सेक्टर में 70 परसेंट लोग रहते हैं और वे इस पर डिपेंड करते हैं। इसलिए इसको सुधारने की जरूरत है। यह ठीक है कि ‘प्रधानमंत्री जन-धन योजना’और अन्य जो स्कीमें आई हैं,उनसे कुछ फायदा हो पाएगा,मगर इसमें और सुधार करने की जरूरत है। जो लोनिंग है,वह प्रायॉरिटी सेक्टर में होनी चाहिए। दूसरा,यह कृऐिा के क्षेत्र में,गांवों में होनी चाहिए। इसके लिए ब्रांचेज होनी चाहिए।

          डिप्टी स्पीकर साहब,आप भी समझते होंगे,जैसे जो को-ऑपरेटिव सेक्टर है,डिमॉनेटाइजेशन के समय से अभी तक हमारे को-ऑपरेटिव बैंकों में जो पुराने नोट जमा हैं,उसके कारण हमारे वे बैंक्स आगे लोनिंग करने में फेल हो रहे हैं। आर.बी.आई. ने परमिशन भी दे दी कि ये नोट्स चेंज कर लीजिए,पर अभी तक वे नोट्स चेंज नहीं कर पाए। इससे तो वे बैंक्स फेल हो जाएंंगे। इसमें दूसरी बात रेट-ऑफ-इंटेरेस्ट की भी है।

          डिप्टी स्पीकर साहब,मैं एक मिनट का समय लूंगा। जहां तक रेट-ऑफ-इंटेरेस्ट की बात है तो आर.बी.आई. की ओर से नाबार्ड को लोन दिए जाते हैं और नाबार्ड से फिर जो फाइनैंशिएल इंस्टीच्यूशंस को दिए जाते हैं,वे इस पर और इंटेरेस्ट लगा देती हैं। इसलिए रेट-ऑफ-इंटेरेस्ट की भी एक सीमित सीमा होनी चाहिए। अगर आर.बी.आई. दो परसेंट पर दे तो आगे नाबार्ड वाले अगर चार परसेंट पर भी दें तो मैं समझता हूं कि जो किसान खुदकुशी कर रहा है,कर्ज़दार हो रहा है,उसे इससे बचाया जा सकता है। आज पंजाब जैसे प्रदेश में पिछले चार महीने में 300 किसानों ने खुदकुशी कर ली। इसलिए किसान जो कर्ज़े के नीचे आ रहे हैं,उसको भी सीरियसली लेने की जरूरत है,बैंकिंग सिस्टम में सुधार करने की जरूरत है।

 

डॉ. अरुण कुमार (जहानाबाद) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय,आपने मुझे स्टेट बैंक (निरसन और संशोधन)विधेयक, 2017 पर बोलने का मौका दिया,इसलिए मैं आपके प्रति आभार व्यक्त करता हूं।

          महोदय,आज देश में जरुरत इस बात की है कि हम फाइनैंशियल इंस्टीटय़ूशन में रिफॉर्म्स लाएंं और उसी की दिशा में यह एक बड़ा रिफॉर्मेटिव स्टेप है। बैंकों की व्यवस्था के सुदृढ़ीकरण के लिए विभिन्न राजनीतिक तथा क्षेत्रीय कारणों से या किसी व्यवस्था को लाभ पहुंचाने की दृऐिट से जो सब्सिडियरी बैंक चलाए जा रहे थे,उनके एकीकरण की यह एक अच्छी पहल है।

          जब यह सरकार माननीय श्री नरेद्र मोदी जी के नेतृत्व में केंद्र में आई,तब कई ऐसे स्टेप्स लिए गए,जो आज ग्लोबल सिनेरियो में आवश्यक हैं। लेथार्जिक सिस्टम रहने की वजह से हम आर्थिक रूप से कई फ्रंटों पर कमजोर पड़े हैं। अभी डिमोनेटाइजेशन एक बड़ा स्टेप था और उसमें बैंकों की जो भूमिका होनी चाहिए थी,वहां सकारात्मक भूमिका नहीं रही है। इस दृऐिट से चाहे वह जीएसटी हो,डिमोनेटाइजेशन हो या फिर कई ऐसे स्टेप्स लिए गए हैं,जो बैंकों से जुड़े हुए हैं,जो सामाजिक न्याय की अवधारणा को मजबूत करने वाली पहल हैं,जिसमें जन धन योजना एक बड़ी क्रंतिकारी पहल है। जिससे हम ने गांव‑गांव से उन लोगों तक बैंक को पहुंचाने का काम किया है,जिन्होंने पीढ़ी दर पीढ़ी बैंक के दरवाजे को नहीं देखा था।

          हमें इस दिशा में एक ऐसी ठोस पहल जरूर करनी चाहिए जिससे बैंक कंज्यूमर के प्रति एकाउंटेबल हों। आज एनपीए पर चर्चा हो रही है, तो निश्चित तौर से जो लोग सामाजिक जीवन में रहते हैं, वे यह महसूस करते हैं कि बैंक भी सकारात्मक भूमिका में नहीं रहते हैं। हम लोन फाइनैंस करते हैं, तो निश्चित तौर से बैंकों की हिस्सेदारी जब मिल जाए, तो कौन इंडस्ट्रीज़, कौन यूनिट, उसका भविऐय कितना सुरक्षित है? इसको नजरअंदाज़ करके बैंकों का फाइनैंस होता है। इसलिए, निश्चित तौर से जो इसमें ब्लैकशिप है, वह भी कम से कम होगी।

          आज जैसे किसान क्रेडिट कार्ड है, जिसके माध्यम से किसानों को लाभ पहुंचाने की योजना हमारे पास है, इसकी जिम्मेवारी भी बैंक पर है, लेकिन मैं कहना चाहता हूं कि किसान क्रेडिट कार्ड का एक ओवरऑल सर्वे कराया जाएगा, तो निश्चित तौर से आप पाएंंगे कि इसमें भी किसानों के साथ फेयरनेस नहीं है। इसलिए, बैंक के स्वरुप को बदलने के लिए, एकाउंटेबल बनाने के लिए और कंज्यूमर ओरिएंंटेड बनाने के लिए इस तरह के ठोस कदम उठाए गए हैं। मैं इस बिल का स्वागत करता हूं और समर्थन करता हूं।

श्री भगवंत मान (संगरूर):  उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, बहुत‑बहुत धन्यवाद, क्योंकि आपने मुझे इस बिल पर बोलने का मौका दिया है।

           एक तरफ स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया में जो मर्जिंग का बिल आया है, इसमें बैंकों को मर्ज किया जा रहा है और दूसरी तरफ यह देखने में आया है कि एसबीआई का अभी जो इंटरेस्ट रेट है, उसे चार पर्सेंट से कम करके साढ़े तीन पर्सेंट किया गया है। इसके बाद जो एटीएम का विदड्राल्स हैं, अगर आपको चार विदड्राल्स होते हैं, तो उन पर  25 पैसे प्रति विदड्राल टैक्स लगाया गया। इसके अलावा, जो ऑन लाइन ट्रंजेक्शंस हैं, वे भी महंगी कर दी गई हैं।

          महोदय, स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाला पूरे देश में बहुत बड़ा बैंक है। अभी एक तरफ आबादी बढ़ने की वजह से जो छोटे गांव हैं, वे कस्बों में तब्दील हो रहे हैं और जो कस्बे हैं, वे छोटे शहरों में तब्दील हो रहे हैं। जो छोटे शहर हैं, वे बड़े शहर बनते जा रहे हैं। अब बैंकों की और ज्यादा ब्रांचेज़ की जरुरत है, लेकिन इस मर्जिंग की वजह से ब्रांचेज़ कम हो जाएंंगी। पंजाब में स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाला की ब्रांचेज़ गांव‑गांव में हैं, लेकिन अब इसके बाद ब्रांचों की संख्या कम होगी, इससे लोगों को दिक्कतें आएंंगी।

          दूसरा, जब नोटबंदी हुई थी, तब यह देखा गया था कि लोगों को कई‑कई दिनों तक  लाइनों में खड़ा होना पड़ा। उस समय बैंकों ने कोई सकारात्मक भूमिका नहीं निभाई और बैंक कैसे उस मामले में फेल रहे। इसका मतलब है कि अभी बैंकों का सिस्टम सेट नहीं है। एसबीआई तो पहले से ही बीमार था, अब पाँच बीमारियाँ और लाकर उसमें डाल दी गई हैं।          जो एनपीए है,उसमें 88 परसेंट एनपीए पब्लिक सैक्टर बैंकों का है। एक तरफ जो छोटे किसान हैं,खेत-मजदूर हैं,गरीब हैं,छोटे दुकानदार हैं,वे बैंक से लोन लेते हैं,किसी कारणवश वे समय पर छोटा सा एमाउंट,पचास हजार रुपये,लाख रुपये वापस नहीं कर पाते,तो उनकी फोटो बैंकों में चिपकाई जा रही है। उनको सोशियली बदनाम किया जा रहा है,जैसे कि कोई क्रिमिनल की फोटो पुलिस स्टेशन में लगती है। दूसरी तरफ बड़े-बड़े औद्योगिक घराने हैं,बड़े-बड़े उद्योगपति हैं,जो लाखों-करोड़ों रुपये लोन लेकर मुकर गए हैं,वे नहीं वापस कर पाये। क्या सरकार किसी बैंक में उनकी फोटो लगाने की कभी हिम्मत कर पायेगी?वे विदेशों में मौज-मस्ती कर रहे हैं।

          महोदय,नोट बंदी के समय पता चल गया कि सरकार की नीयत क्या थी। वादा किया गया था डिजिटल इंडिया का,वादा किया गया था कि 15 लाख रुपये हर एक भारतीय के खाते में आएंंगे। ...(व्यवधान) 15 लाख की बात छोड़ दीजिए,जो हमारे घर में दो-चार हजार रुपये पड़े थे,वे भी ले गये। ...(व्यवधान)वे भी नोट बंदी की वजह से छीन कर ले गये। ...(व्यवधान)मैं यह पूछना चाहूंगा कि अभी तक तो नहीं आए,लेकिन अच्छे दिनों के इंतजार में हम हैं। ...(व्यवधान)अच्छे दिन मेरे ख्याल में अब नहीं आने वाले। ...(व्यवधान)ये लोगों को लूटने का काम कर रहे हैं। ...(व्यवधान)इन बैंकों ने लोगों का एक-एक रुपया जो आखिरी था,वह भी निकलवा लिया। ...(व्यवधान)यह इनकी पॉलिसी है। यह डिजिटल इंडिया का फेल्योर है।...(व्यवधान)

                                                                                                         

श्री कौशलेद्र कुमार (नालंदा) : महोदय, आपने मुझे स्टेट बैंक (निरसन और संशोधन)विधेयक, 2017 पर बोलने का मौका दिया,इसके लिए बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद। पिछले कुछ समय से सरकार का प्रयास चल रहा है। एनपीए के कारण छोटे-छोटे बैंकों की स्थिति बिगड़ी है। उसमें सुधार कैसे किया जाए,उसी प्रक्रिया के तहत स्टेट बैंक के पांच सहायक बैंक,स्टेट बैंक ऑफ हैदराबाद,स्टेट बैंक ऑफ बीकानेर एंंड जयुपर,स्टेट बैंक ऑफ मैसूर,स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाला,स्टेट बैंक ऑफ त्रावनकोर को पूर्णरूपेण स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया में शामिल कर लिया गया है।

          माननीय मंत्री जी को मैं इस विधेयक को लाने के लिए साधुवाद देता हूं। मेरा अनुरोध होगा कि माननीय मंत्री जी उन ग्रामीण इलाकों में,खास कर जहां स्टेट बैंक नहीं हैं,वहां भी खोलने का प्रयास किया जाए। एसबीआई को देश का सबसे बड़ा बैंक अब मान लिया गया है। लगभग 37 करोड़ इनके ग्राहक हो गये, 24 हजार शाखायें खुल गईं, 59 हजार एटीएम हो गए। एसबीआई ने कुछ चार्ज जो लगाया है,उस पर माननीय मंत्री जी से अनुरोध है,यह आम पब्लिक को कहा जाता है कि जन धन योजना के चलते यह चार्ज लिया जाता है,उस पर पहल करने की जरूरत है,जिससे कि आम लोगों से सरचार्ज नहीं लिया जाए।

          अब 6 छोटे बैंक और रह गए हैं,जिन्हें सरकार किसी न किसी बड़े बैंक में शामिल करने पर विचार कर रही है। मुझे लगता है कि एनपीए घटाने के लिए अगर छोटे-छोटे बैंकों को जोड़ दिया जाता है,तो निश्चित रूप से एनपीए घटेगा। जो बड़े-बड़े उद्योगपति आज लोन लेकर बाहर भाग गए हैं,उनसे भी पैसा वसूलने में कामयाबी मिलेगी।

          मैं इस बिल का समर्थन करता हूं और अनुरोध करूंगा कि जिन ग्रामीण इलाकों में एसबीआई बैंकों की कमी है,उन सुदूर इलाकों में भी इसकी सेवा दी जाए,खास कर ग्राहकों को जो सुविधा मिलनी चाहिए,वह उन्हें मिले। बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद।

                                                                                               

श्री दुऐयंत चौटाला (हिसार) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय,आपने मुझे बोलने का अवसर दिया,इसके लिए मैं आपको धन्यवाद देता हूं। आज एक बड़ा अहम बिल इस सदन में आ रहा है,क्योंकि छोटे-छोटे स्टेट बैंक्स को हम एक कंसोलिडेटेड बड़ा बैंक बनाने का काम कर रहे हैं। पांच मुख्य बिंदु हैं,जो कहीं न कहीं हमारी इकोनामिक्स पर भी आने वाले समय में असर दिखायेंगे,फाइनैंशियल सैक्टर को भी यह देखने पड़ेंगे। इतना बड़ा मर्जर तो किया जा रहा है,मगर हमारे पास जो इक्विपमेंट इस इनफ्रास्ट्रक्चर को चलाने के लिए होना चाहिए,क्या हमारा मंत्रालय आज उसके लिए पूरी तौर पर तैयार है?इन मर्जर के बाद 24 हजार से ज्यादा ब्रांचेज हमारे इन बैंक्स की हो जाएंंगी, 58 हजार से ज्यादा एटीएम पूरे देश के अंदर इन बैंक्स को एक होकर चलाने पड़ेंगे। नोट बंदी के दौरान भी देखने का मौका मिला,लेकिन कहीं न कहीं इतना बड़ा मर्जर टू बिग टू फेल न हो जाए,क्योंकि हम ग्लोबल एन्वायर्नमेंट की लड़ाई के लिए कदम उठा रहे हैं। दूसरी तरफ जब इतना बड़ा मर्जर देखते हैं तो कितने एम्पलाइज़ को एक इफ्रास्ट्रक्चर में लाने का काम करना पड़ेगा? 2008, 2010 में मर्जर हुआ था,उसके बाद झटका मिला था। क्या आने वाले समय में टेक्नोलाजी की एडवांसमेंट के साथ हम बच पाएंंगे?इसके बारे में क्लेरिफिकेशन माननीय मंत्री जी दें।

          हम एक महत्वपूर्ण चीज देखते हैं कि ये बैंक्स,फाइनेंस लैंग्वेज में कहते हैं कि बैड बैंक्स हैं क्योंकि इनके ऊपर एनपीए बहुत है। क्या हम बैड बैंक्स को कन्सॉलिडेट करके एक गुड बैंक को बैड बनाने का काम कर रहे हैं?स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया पर इतना बड़ा एनपीए है,जब हम छोटे बैंक्स को कन्सॉलिडेट करते हैं और एक बड़े बैंक में डालते हैं तो एनपीए का लैवल और बढ़ेगा।

                   भारत में ग्रामीण क्षेत्र ऐसा है जिसमें बैंकिंग सैक्टर की फैसिलिटी नहीं है। हम बड़े स्टेट बैंक का रूप लाकर स्टेट बैंक को तो छोटा करेंगे,क्योंकि एरिया कन्सॉलिडेट होगा। जहां बैंक ब्रांचिस ओवरलैप हो रही हैं,बंद होंगी,वहां एक बैंक की ब्रांच रह जाएगी। हम प्राइवेट सैक्टर को कहीं न कहीं रास्ता दे रहे हैं कि जहां हम लोगों को सरकारी इफ्रास्ट्रक्चर से फायदा दे रहे थे,वह भी सरकारी सैक्टर में जाकर अपना एरिया बढ़ाए। मैं समझता हूं कि इस पूरे मर्जर से प्राइवेट बैंक्स चाहे एचडीएफसी हो,आईसीआईसीआई हो या कोई और बैंक हो,उनको फायदा होगा। माननीय मंत्री जी इस पर क्लेरिफिकेशन दें। यह जरूरी है कि हम ग्लोबल एन्वायर्नमेंट की लड़ाई के लिए सरकार की तरफ से इतना बड़ा इफ्रास्ट्रक्चर बनाएंं कि आने वाले समय में ग्लोबल एन्वायर्नमेंट में जहां सपोर्ट फाइनेंशियल की जरूरत हो,स्टेट बैंक आफ इंडिया दे पाए।

          मैं माननीय मंत्री जी से कहना चाहता हूं कि जरूर इस पर विचार करें कि टू बिग,टू हैंडल होने के बजाय बैंक फेल न हो जाएंं। इस पर सरकार जरूर अपनी निगरानी रखे। मैं इस बिल का समर्थन करता हूं। आपने मुझे बोलने का मौका दिया,इसके लिए आपका बहुत धन्यवाद।

 

SHRI E.T. MOHAMMAD BASHEER (PONNANI): Hon. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, I am thankful to you for giving me this opportunity to speak on this very important Bill.

          If an enactment is made on the basis of this Bill, I think, some positive changes can be made. At the same time, I would say that the negative aspects of this Bill are much more than the positive changes, which we may expect.

          Sir, coming to the positive side of it, the size of business entity   will have additional strength and scope to open up link with the global banking system.  Similarly, global markets will recognize India’s strength in the banking sector.  The number of posts such as CMD, Executive Director, GM and Zonal Officers can be reduced.  The number of Government nominees can also be reduced.  Filling up of the business gap can be done up to an extent.  Efficiency of the banks can also be upgraded.   These are certain positive changes, which we can expect by making such an enactment.

          Sir, we should not ignore the negative part of it.  What exactly is that? Firstly, it will reduce the accessibility of the common man to the banking system in our country, which is not a small thing.  It is really a kind of dangerous thing.  Secondly, merger will result in closing of certain ATMs in our country.  This will result in a kind of jobless situation.  Similarly, it may block even further recruitment in the banking system.  So, it should be discouraged as it is not a welcome kind of thing.  It will also worsen the unemployment situation.  That is what the banking sector employees are also apprehending.  So, it deserves a very serious consideration.

          Sir, as regards Financial Inclusion, it is also a very important issue.  We are all discussing about the common man and the banking sector in the uncovered areas and villages.  Considering all these things, this Financial Inclusion is a major things.  I believe that   this kind of a situation may also worsen thing. That is another apprehension, which I want to express.

          Similarly, there is some kind of an execution risk also.  Merging of two financial institutions   may cause some kind of an execution risk, which may create a lot of confusion in the banking sector.

          There is one more point, which I would like to make.  We are discussing about the banking sector.  As was said by a learned friend of mine, when the banks were nationalized, there were high hopes and expectations.  It is to ensure the common-man’s accessibility to banks. Any move to curtail that should be discouraged.  That is what I want to say.

          Financial and technology development should not only be the criteria in the banking sector and on the other hand, social commitment and social viability should be given due consideration in the banking sector.

          These are my humble observations on this Bill.

SHRI N.K. PREMACHANDRAN (KOLLAM): Thank you very much, Sir, for affording me this opportunity to intervene in this discussion.

          Sir, I rise to oppose this Bill in toto on two grounds – on technical grounds and also on merits. The technical objection which I would like to raise is that this Act is to repeal two Acts – the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959, the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956 and also to amend the existing State Bank of India Act, 1955.

          My humble question to the Government through you, Sir, is this.  For what purpose, the Parliament functions?  The Government has already merged banks.  Five banks have already been merged with the State Bank of India. The Government has invoked Section 35(ii) of the SBI Act, 1955 and by invoking Section 35(ii) of the SBI Act, 1955 on 22nd February, 2017, the Government has issued a Notification and merged five banks with the State Bank of India. 

          Sir, you may kindly see that. You are the guardian and you are the protector of our democracy and our Parliamentary democratic rights.  For what purpose, the Parliament functions? The Parliament is a mere spectator when the Executive and the Government is merging five banks with the State Bank of India.  We are mere spectators and, now, you want us to put a stamp on the Government or the Executive action for which they have put-forth this Bill.  The Parliament is not just for putting a stamp on the actions of the Executive.  It has its own rights and privileges to discuss and debate as to what are the merits and demerits or pros and cons of a particular action that has not been done without having a debate and discussion in the Parliament or without informing the Parliament.  By means of issuance of a mere Notification on 22nd February, 2017, you have simply merged five banks with the State Bank of India. Kindly see that the House considers this technical point. 

The State Bank of Hyderabad is constituted by virtue of the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956.  All other four banks have been established by way of the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959.  These two are the creations of the Parliament. All these five banks are the creations of the Statute.  These are the children of this Parliament. How can the children of Parliament be taken away by the Executive?  How can you simply take away the children and give them to a grandmother or some paternal mother without informing the Parliament?  Our children or our creations are being taken away without informing and without getting concurrence or consent of the House. I feel that it is a breach of the right of the Parliament.  The Executive can do anything.  Since you have the majority, the Parliament will endorse it. This is not a good practice for the Parliamentary democracy.  The Executive is only dominating the rights and privileges of the Parliament and, therefore, this matter has to be looked into.  I request and appeal to the Government to look into it. Why do you not come to the Parliament and say that merger of banks is the need of the hour and it is highly necessary?  Why do you not come to the Parliament first and get the will of the people?  After getting will of the people, you could very-well merge the banks with the State Bank of India.  Instead of first coming to the Parliament, you have taken all the actions and then subsequently you are coming to the Parliament just to get the seal or stamp of the Parliament.  It is totally undemocratic.  It is against the will of the people.  That has to be reconsidered. That is my objection on technical grounds.

          Sir, I am coming to the merits. By a unilateral decision of the Government, the State Bank of Travancore, State Bank of Mysore, State Bank of Hyderabad, State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and the State Bank of Patiala have been merged by the Government through a Notification. What is the idea behind this merger?  The idea is to create a big bank of world-class size but in India we do not need very big banks.  We need good banks to serve the needs of the common people.

In USA and other countries, we have seen in recent years, big banks were a cause of turmoil and the Government had to pump in taxpayers’ money to save them.  In USA, after global recession which took place in 2008, the Government doled out 2,250 billion dollars to save their banks.  The myth that big banks are automatically strong was exploded after the global recession which took place in the US and the globe in the year 2008.  On the other hand, if a bank is too big, it will become insensitive and inaccessible to the poor and the common people.  Big banks will take care of big people only.  Big banks tend to give bigger loans and earn bigger returns.  Kindly see, in India, banks represent hard-earned savings of the poor people.  Sir, 70 per cent of the total deposits of the banks are domestic savings of the common masses.  Banks cannot take risk with the precious savings of the common poor/masses of the country.  That comes to around 70 per cent of the people.  Already the banks are saddled with huge bad loans and Government is unable to recover the same.  Even the recent insolvency cases proposed by the Government will not get back the money.  RBI has indicated that there will be a huge haircut by the banks which means the banks will have to sacrifice furthermore.

          Kindly see the implications of the merger.  I would like to seek a clarification from the hon. Minister as to what are the implications post merger.  It has taken place in the month of February.  They said that SBI will be more efficient.  But, it is observed that after the merger, SBI is having the 1argest share of bad debt.  That is more than Rs. 1,37,000 crore.  After merger, SBI has started closing down the branches which means a reduction in service to the poor people.  Is that the rationalisation, is that efficiency we are talking about?  There are reports that people are not satisfied with the merger.  Almost all the unions – All India Bank Employees Association and the Bank Employees Federation of India – in the banking sector are opposing the merger.   The Kerala Government is opposing the merger.  The State Legislative Assembly has passed a unanimous resolution to stop the merger of the State Bank of Travancore with the State Bank of India. 

          Further, after merger, SBI’s consolidated balance sheet is in net loss.  For the first time in the history of SBI, its balance sheet has come into net loss.  The Government is the loser; the shareholders are the losers.  India needs expansion of banks where the banking density is one of the lowest in the world.  We need bank expansion, not consolidation.  So, I would request the Government to kindly consider it and review its decision and go back with decentralisation and consolidation of the banks and not with centralisation of the banks.  We want expansion and maximum penetration among the rural areas.

          With these words, I oppose the Bill.  Thank you very much, Sir.

 

SHRI DHARAM VIRA GANDHI (PATIALA): Thank you, Sir, for giving me an opportunity to speak on the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill.  I oppose this Bill from a different perspective than the rest of my colleagues.  I think, through this Bill and through many Bills brought during the last three years, including GST, there is a continuous attempt by the Government to compromise with the federal principles and the federal structure of the country, to impinge upon the rights of the States and to compromise with the diversity of the States and the country.  I think the title song sung during the launch of GST, ‘one nation, one tax, one market’ is not just an economic reform, it is not just a tax reform, it has much bigger political connotations viz. more centralisation of powers with the Centre and less and less with the States. 

          I think the future of this country lies in unity and diversity in which diversity is primary and unity is secondary. We have to allow an atmosphere for diversity to blossom fully in this country – diversity of all kinds: nationality, sub-nationalities, religious, cultural, ethnic, whatsoever they are in this country – and we should not centralise the powers with the Centre, may be economic or otherwise.  It is not just an economic attempt. It is very subtle and very smart way and an attempt to make the centralized India a one India and not accepting in true spirit the diversity of the country. I believe that this is just one attempt and in this way, we believe that we will not be able to save the diversity of the country and not work according to the federal spirit of the Constitution.

So, I oppose this Bill from the federal angle, from the angle of rise of the States, from the angle of the rise of diversity to blossom fully to keep India united. Thank you very much.

 

SHRI JOSE K. MANI(KOTTAYAM): Sir, on the State Bank (Repeal and Amendment) Bill, 2017, I would like to make a few observations.

          Sir, of late, we find that the NPAs, Non Performing Assets, are on the rise in the Public Sector Banks and also in the Scheduled Banks.  When you analyse the clientele who are making the NPAs, we find that a majority of them are the corporate clients with crores and crores of rupees as outstanding bad debts.  But we are now going for the amalgamation.  We find their amalgamation with the SBI; many banks have been merged.  As said earlier, we are doing this to cover up the bad debts or to spread the risk.  But finally, what will end up is at the expense of the common man?

          As said earlier, for example, in the State of Kerala, as you know, the SBT, State Bank of Travancore, which is commonly called the Malayalis’ bank, was performing well.  A good service was being given by SBT and a good clientele also was there.  But now it has been merged. We find that wherever in a town there is an SBT and an SBI branch, one of the SBT branches was taken away. Also, we find that the service of the SBI in comparison to the SBT is very poor. Slowly, the customers have withdrawn from the SBI accounts as the SBI has started taking service charges. That is why, I said that it has taken place at the expense of the common man.

Now, what happens when you take up the demonetization?  When demonetization was implemented, the Government had given a picture that this was going to boost up the economy. Later on, day by day, we find that the poor is becoming poorer.  Or, in other words, it is actually robbing the poor people. Why do I say so? Even if you take up this SBI, there was no such service charge initially.  But after luring the common man by asking them to open up an account, especially with merging, the accounts will go to the SBI and the charges have started increasing.  For example, the SBI customers with a basic saving bank deposit, a facility for the poorer sections of the society, get four free withdrawals, including ATM withdrawal in a month. After which withdrawals will be charged at Rs. 15 plus service tax at an SBI branch and at Rs. 20 plus service tax at other bank ATMs.  It is now mandatory for the SBI account holders to maintain a balance of Rs. 5,000 in metropolitan areas, Rs. 3,000 in urban areas, Rs. 2,000 in semi-urban areas and Rs. 1,000 in rural areas. For metro areas, if the difference between the minimum balance and the actual balance is 50 per cent, then the SBI charges Rs. 50 plus service tax as penalty.  If the difference is anywhere between 50 per cent and 70 per cent, the penalty is Rs. 75 plus service tax. If the shortfall is more than 75 per cent, the charges are Rs. 100 excluding the service tax.  People with meagre earnings will find it hard to maintain the specified balance, if such exorbitant high service charges are imposed.  SBI is literally robbing the depositors.  I end up by saying that by merging and putting up more accounts of the common man in the SBI, we find that poor people are taxed and they are robbed.  So, I oppose the Bill. Thank you.

 

SHRI C.N. JAYADEVAN (THRISSUR): Sir, the State Banks (Repeal and Amendment) Bill, 2017 is necessitated consequent to the acquisition of State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, State Bank of Mysore, State Bank of Patiala and State Bank of Travancore which were constituted under the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 and State Bank of Hyderabad which was under the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956.

          At this moment, it is pertinent to note that the past July 19, 2017 was the 48th anniversary of bank nationalization. It was in 1969 the Indira Government was forced to nationalize banks following the persistent demand of the bank employees under the banner of All India Bank Employees’ Association (AIBEA) and the Left Parties in the country. The public sector banks became the main engine of growth and development of our economy constituting nearly 90 per cent of the total banking system in India.

          Unfortunately, the present NDA Government at the Centre is trying to undermine the public sector banking by amalgamations, disinvestment and privatization and thus allowing the foreign banks to capture our banks. The young RBI Deputy Governor, Mr. Viral Acharya has already called for re-privatization of nationalized banks and sale of their subsidiaries and other assets. The myth that the big banks are automatically strong banks has since broken by experience of failures of many big private banks worldwide, including in the USA.

          While the SBI as a standalone entity reported a profit of Rs.10,484 crore for the year 2016-17, the new consolidated SBI after the merger of five associate banks made a loss of Rs.390 crore for the same year. The gross NPAs of the consolidated entity jumped to 9.04 per cent which in absolute terms was Rs.1.79 lakh crore. While the Government and the Central Bank have repeatedly said that the Indian banking system would be better off if some public sector banks are consolidated to have fewer but healthier entities, the SBI episode yet again shows that mergers are no panacea in Indian banking. Again the Government is planning for merger of weak banks with not-so-strong large ones.

          There are no short cuts to rehabilitating banks except taking strong measures for the recovery of sticky loans of State-owned banks and recapitalization of beleaguered banks. The public sector banks have to be defended and saved. Fighting against privatization of banks is in the national interest and we and the bank employees will do it. The Bank Employees’ Unions have already called for an all-India strike on August 22nd. I object to the Bill.

                                                                                               

 ADV. JOICE GEORGE (IDUKKI): Sir, I rise to oppose this Bill for four reasons. The first reason is rather technical and it has been dealt with by our learned colleague, Mr. N.K.Premachandran.

On 22nd February, 2017, the amalgamation of all the banks has been done by issuing various orders. I appeal to the entire House that this is an infringement on the rights of the entire House and this Parliament. If we develop a tendency to surrender all our rights to the Executive and if we create an atmosphere to consider this Parliament as taken for granted, it will be disastrous for our Parliamentary democracy.

          Second, the stated objectives for the amalgamation of the banks are, rationalization of resources, reduction of costs, better profitability, lower costs of funds leading to better rate of interests to public at large, improved productivity and consumer services.

          Keeping all these aspects in view and considering all the aspects of profitability and improved services, what is the result of amalgamation of all the State Banks? The result of amalgamation of all the State Banks is closing down of branches in the rural as well as the unbanked areas. It is because of this amalgamation that the banking concentration is decreasing in the backward areas as well as in tribal habitats where less privileged people live. For example, in Kerala, the branches of the State Bank of Travancore have been closed on the basis of this amalgamation. In rural and unbanked areas, people are finding it very difficult to bank with their banks also.

          The second aspect is service charge. The purpose is to better the profitability. Is the amalgamation working on that count? For the purpose of increasing profitability, the banks are imposing more service charges. … (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please conclude.

ADV. JOICE GEORGE : Sir, I am concluding.

          The other aspect is about lending to the primary sectors, especially the agriculture sector. The banks are trying to reduce their NPAs. They have devised a mechanism to declare the farm loans as NPAs on the basis of certain criteria. Earlier, the tendency of the banks was to give more and more benefits to the farmers so as to prolong their term of loans. But, now, after amalgamation, only for this purpose of reducing their NPAs, these banks are not touching the corporates, these banks are not taking steps against the corporates, but are taking steps against the farmers and declaring their loans as NPAs. … (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please conclude.

ADV. JOICE GEORGE : Finally, Sir, the banks are not providing loans to the farmers. The Government has done a laudable work in terms of social security measures and mudra loans. But the banks are not giving loans to the MUDRA Banks also. … (Interruptions)

SHRI GAURAV GOGOI (KALIABOR): Thank you, Sir. My question is just about minimum account balance. 

          उपाध्यक्ष महोदय,जब से एस.बी.आई. ने ‘मिनिमम अकाउंट बैलेंस’को 5,000 रुपये किया है,तब से लोगों पर इसका बहुत बुरा प्रभाव पड़ रहा है। यह नाइंसाफी है। इस पर महीने की पैनल्टी कहीं 20 रुपये और कहीं 100 रुपये है।

          उपाध्यक्ष महोदय,महीने में कभी-कभी लोगों का ‘मिनिमम अकाउंट बैलेंस’ 5,000 रुपये से नीचे चला जाता है। यह स्वाभाविक है। स्टूडेंट्स को अपनी फीस भरनी होती है,किसी को अपनी दवाई लेनी होती है आदि। यदि इन 5,000 रुपयों के ऊपर स्टेट ओन्ड एस.बी.आइज़. पैनल्टी लगाएंंगे,तो यह एक गलती होने के साथ ही लोगों के साथ नाइंसाफी भी होगी। इस गलती को एस.बी.आई. को सुधारना चाहिए। धन्यवाद।

 

वित्त मंत्रालय में राज्य मंत्री (श्री संतोऐा कुमार गंगवार): माननीय उपाध्यक्ष जी, मैं आपके माध्यम से पूरे सदन को धन्यवाद देना चाहूँगा।

          माननीय उपाध्यक्ष जी, यह एक छोटा सा बिल है। यहाँ उपस्थित माननीय 24 सदस्यों ने अन्य बहुत सारे विऐायों पर भी अपने सुझाव दिए। इससे हमें यह समझ में आता है कि ‘वित्त’ के प्रति हमारे साथियों में कितनी रुचि है। एस.बी.आई. सब्सिडियरीज़ बैंक एक्ट, 1959 और स्टेट बैंक ऑफ हैदराबाद, 1956 को रिपील करने तथा एस.बी.आई. एक्ट, 1955 में आवश्यक संशोधन के लिए यहाँ पर एक बिल लाया गया है।

       माननीय उपाध्यक्ष जी, इस वऐाऩ को दिनाँक 1 अप्रैल, 2017 से एस.बी.आई. में औपचारिक रूप से उसके 5 सब्सिडियरीज़ बैंक्स का विलय हो गया था। स्टेट बैंक ऑफ बीकानेर एण्ड जयपुर में 75 पर सेंट शेयर्स स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के थे। स्टेट बैंक ऑफ मैसूर में 90 पर सेंट शेयर्स स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के थे। स्टेट बैंक ऑफ त्रवणकोर में 79.09 पर सेंट शेयर्स स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के थे और स्टेट बैंक ऑफ पटियाला और स्टेट बैंक ऑफ हैदराबाद में 100 पर सेंट शेयर्स स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के थे। इन बैंक्स का स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया में मर्जर हुआ है। इन सभी बैंक्स का मर्जर एस.बी.आई. एक्ट के सैक्शन-35 में कवर्ड है। ये सारे बैंक्स एस.बी.आई. द्वारा संचालित थे।

          माननीय उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, इसके द्वारा कुछ बातें प्रमुख रूप से सामने आ रही हैं। इन बैंक्स के स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया में मर्जर के फलस्वरूप एस.बी.आई. दुनिया के 50 बड़े बैंकों में शामिल हो गया है। इसका दुनिया के बड़े बैंकों में 45वाँ नंबर है। इस मर्जर के फलस्वरूप इसके कुल ग्राहकों की संख्या 37 करोड़ हो गई है। इस मर्जर के कारण स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया की कुल ब्राँचों की संख्या 24 हजार तथा ए.टी.एम्स. की संख्या 59 हजार हो गई है। इस मर्जर के फलस्वरूप एस.बी.आई. का डिपॉज़िट बेस 26 लाख करोड़ रुपये और उसके एडवाँसेज़ 18.5 लाख करोड़ रुपये के आस-पास हो गए हैं। स्टेट बैंक ऑफ इंडिया के कर्मचारियों की संख्या भी 2 लाख से बढ़कर 2 लाख 72 हजार हो गई है। यह बात मैंने यहाँ इसलिए बताई है, क्योंकि इसके संबंध में यहाँ हमारे बहुत से साथियों ने अपनी आशंकाएंं व्यक्त की हैं। इन आशंकाओं के संबंध में मैं इतना कह सकता हूँ कि ये सारी आशंकाएंं आने वाले समय में निर्मूल ही साबित होंगी। हमें इससे यह फायदा होगा कि नये बैंक के पास ज्यादा केपिटल बेस होगा तथा ज्यादा मात्रा में लोन दे पाएंंगे। बैंक की एफिशिएंंसी और ग्राहकों को दी जाने वाली सुविधाओं में भी सुधार होगा। छोटे बैंक के ग्राहकों को फाइनैंशियल इंस्ट्रूमेंट्स जैसे म्यूचुअल फण्ड,इंश्योरेंस आदि जो बड़े बैंकों को उपलब्ध होते हैं वह भी मिलेंगे और इंटर बैंकिंग ट्रंजैक्शन का वॉल्यूम भी घटेगा,जिससे क्लीयरिंग में होने वाले समय में बचत होगी और बैंक की कार्य कुशलता भी बढ़ेगी। वऐाऩ 1971 में बैंकों का राऐट्रीयकरण हुआ था...(व्यवधान)

PROF. SAUGATA ROY : It was in 1969 that 14 banks were nationalised.

श्री संतोऐा कुमार गंगवार : वऐाऩ 1971 ज्यादा पॉपुलर हो गया है, इसलिए मैंने बोल दिया। आपकी बात दुरुस्त है। उस समय बैंकों को आम आदमी के लिए खोलने की बात हुई थी, लेकिन सही अर्थों में बैंकों के दरवाजे आम आदमी के लिए अब खुले हैं और अब तक 29 करोड़ से अधिक लोगों ने बैंकों में खाते खोले हैं। इनमें से एक चौथाई खाते जीरो बैलेंस के साथ खोले गए हैं। यह भी अपने आप में रिकार्ड है। जहां तक कृऐिा क्षेत्र का सवाल है वऐाऩ 2009-10 में कृऐिा क्षेत्र को दिए जाने वाले लोन की राशि 3 लाख 50 हजार करोड़ रुपये थी, वह वऐाऩ 2016-17 में बढ़कर 10 लाख 65 हजार करोड़ रुपये हो गयी है। हम निरंतर इस ओर ध्यान दे रहे हैं और आम आदमी की चिंता कर रहे हैं। जहां तक मिनिमम बैलेंस का सवाल है, मैंने अभी बताया कि 29 करोड़ खातों में से एक चौथाई जीरो बैलेंस के साथ खोले गए हैं। प्राइवेट बैंकों के बारे में शंकाएंं व्यक्त की गयी हैं, जिन पर मैं कोई टिप्पणी नहीं कर सकता हूं, लेकिन हमारे राऐट्रीयकृत बैंकों में आपको ये असुविधाएंं नहीं मिलेंगी। हमारी इच्छा है कि देश के हर व्यक्ति तक बैंक पहुंचे। देश में 6 लाख से अधिक गांव हैं और इनमें बैंकों की आवश्यकता है क्योंकि सभी लोग खाता खोल रहे हैं। मैं सदस्यों से आग्रह करूंगा कि अगर आपको लगता है कि इस बैंक में खाता खुले, अगर वे लिखकर देंगे, तो हम उस पर विचार करेंगे और लाइसेंस भी देने का काम करेंगे। हमने पेमेंट बैंक, डाक घर को बैंक में बदलने का काम किया और बैंक मित्र बनाने का काम किया। यह सब हमने इसलिए किया क्योंकि हम बैंक को हर व्यक्ति तक पहुंचाना चाहते हैं।

          जहां तक किसी बैंक की शाखा को बंद करने की बात है या स्टेट बैंक ऑफ त्रावणकोर की शाखा बंद करने की बात है तो मैं यह कहना चाहूंगा कि इस बैंक का नाम जरूर बदला है, लेकिन त्रावणकोर बैंक की कोई भी ब्रांच बंद नहीं होगी। यदि आपको किसी जगह पर बैंक की शाखा खोलने की आवश्यकता लगती है और अगर आप लिखकर देंगे तो उस पर भी विचार किया जाएगा। लेकिन एक बात जरूर बताना चाहता हूं कि किसी स्थान पर अगर दो शाखाएंं हैं, तो उनको एक जरूर किया जा सकता है। लेकिन जहां भी आवश्यकता होगी वहां हम ब्रांचिज़ खोलने का काम अवश्य करेंगे। हमने प्रायोरिटी सेक्टर के टारगेट को वऐाऩ 2016-17 में पूरा किया है और उससे आगे बढ़कर काम किया है। ग्रामीण क्षेत्र में आरआरबी टारगेट के हिसाब से काम कर रही है। ग्रामीण क्षेत्र में हमारी 75 परसेंट लैण्डिंग प्रायोरिटी सेक्टर के लिए है। यह बात सही है कि मर्जर से एसबीआई का दायरा बढ़ेगा और इसकी जो भी आवश्यकताएंं होंगी, उसके हिसाब से हम लोग काम करेंगे। वास्तव में अब यह बैंक प्राइवेट बैंक्स को भी टक्कर देगा और आने वाले समय में एसबीआई अच्छे ढंग से काम करेगा।

           हम जिस तरह से काम कर रहे हैं, उससे लोगों में बैंकों के प्रति रूझान बढ़ रहा है। बैंकिंग क्षेत्र में जहां कहीं भी हम जाते हैं तो लोगों को लगता है कि यह सरकार जिस ढंग से काम कर रही है, आम आदमी के हित को ध्यान में रखकर काम कर रही है। हमारे साथियों ने कुछ आशंकाएंं व्यक्त की हैं। मेरा कहना है कि उन आशंकाओं का समाधान किया जाएगा, लेकिन जो मर्जर हुआ है, वह बड़े हित को ध्यान में रखकर किया गया है। मैं आपको विश्वास के साथ कह सकता हूं कि इससे आपको असुविधा नहीं होगी, बल्कि आप यह महसूस करेंगे कि आने वाले समय में यह परिवर्तन अच्छी दिशा में जाएगा और इसके अच्छे परिणाम सामने आएंंगे। मैं अधिक नहीं बोलूंगा और इस आग्रह के साथ अपनी बात समाप्त करूंगा कि इस पर आप सभी का सहयोग हमें मिलेगा। बहुत-बहुत धन्यवाद।

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is:

“That the Bill to repeal the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959, the State Bank of Hyderabad Act, 1956 and further to amend the State Bank of India Act, 1955, be taken into consideration.”   The motion was adopted.

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The House will now take up clause-by-clause consideration of the Bill.

          The question is:

          “That clauses 2 to 8 stand part of the Bill.” The motion was adopted.

Clauses 2 to 8 were added to the Bill.

Clause 1, the Enacting Formula and the Long Title were added to the Bill.

SHRI SANTOSH KUMAR GANGWAR : Sir, I beg to move :

          “That the Bill be passed.” HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is:

          “That the Bill be passed.” The motion was adopted.

     

*t65 Title: Introduction of the Code on Wages Bill, 2017.

 

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Now, we are taking-up Revised Supplementary List of Business, Item A, Shri Bandaru Dattatreya.

THE MINISTER OF STATE OF THE MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT (SHRI BANDARU DATTATREYA): Sir, I beg to move for leave to introduce a Bill to consolidate and amend the laws relating to wages and bonus and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Motion moved:

“That leave be granted to introduce a Bill to consolidate and amend the laws relating to wages and bonus and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”   SHRI N.K. PREMACHANDRAN (KOLLAM): Sir, I strongly oppose the introduction of the Bill. This Bill is circulated today morning at around nine o’clock. It is a very important Bill where structural changes are being brought in the Labour Acts like Minimum Wages Act, Payment of Gratuity Act, etc. I am not going into the details of it because of paucity of time.

          My first objection is that the Bill was circulated only today morning around nine o’clock, and a Supplementary Business is being brought in the House for the Bill to be introduced. This can never be agreed upon as per Rule 72 (2) of the Rules of Procedure. According to Rule 72 (2) of the Rules of Procedure: “A Member is entitled to raise objection regarding the Constitutional or Legislative competence of the Bill and can be opposed at the time of introduction of the Bill.” Today, at this time, I am not able to oppose the Constitutional as well as the Legislative competence of the Bill. It is because I could not go through the contents of the Bill. It means that the right of a Member is being infringed, which cannot be allowed. I am saying this because this is affecting the entire workforce in the country. The Government of India is going to bring drastic labour reforms, and the Government of India is going to codify 45 labour legislations into four legislations. The first legislation is coming to the House in the last moments of the Session when it is to be concluded and that too in a hurried and hasty manner. Why is the Government bringing this Bill in a hurried and hasty manner? It means that you want to avoid the opposition to the introduction of the Bill, which cannot be allowed. This is my first objection.

          I got these points within the limited time that I could go through the Constitution as well as the Rules of Procedure. Otherwise, if you go through the contents of the Bill, then we find that so many existing labour legislations are being drastically changed. So, we could have made so many oppositions relating to Constitutional as well as on Legislative competency. Since, I could not go through the Bill in-depth, so I am making some objections for the time being.

          My second objection is that this matter comes under Schedule Seven List 3 and entry number 22 -- Trade unions, industrial and labour disputes; entry number 23 -- Social security and social insurance, employment and unemployment; and entry number 24 -- welfare of labour including conditions of work, provident funds, employers’ liability, workmen’s compensation, invalidity and old-age pensions and maternity benefits. It means that most of the labour legislations are coming within the jurisdiction of the Concurrent List or the subject comes under the Concurrent List. The Concurrent List means that the State as well as the Union Government is well empowered to make legislation. I do accept it and if the Parliament is making a legislation on labour laws, then definitely it will override the State legislations.

Not only in Kerala but in almost all the States, many labour legislation in respect of payment of wages, fair wages and other legislation are still there and the Government of India is going to codify the labour legislation. First code is regarding wages. But unfortunately, none of the States in the country is even consulted. That means, it is totally against the federal principles of the Constitution, which is the basic feature of the Constitution. Now, the Government is trying to alter or attack the basic structure of the Constitution. That cannot be allowed. Since it is a matter concerning the Concurrent List, States should be consulted before making such labour reforms. That is my second objection.

          Third is about the Payment of Gratuity Act. You are well aware…. … (Interruptions)

   

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA:  This is not a point of order.

SHRI N.K. PREMACHANDRAN : This is not a point of order. Kindly see… … (Interruptions)

SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA: He is objecting  to the introduction as per Rule 72, which categorically says, you can object on the ground whether the Bill is within the competence of Parliament to pass such a law or not. He is showing his own ignorance by saying that he has not gone through it, etc. It is a new Bill; it is being introduced. Now, he started discussing the merits of different labour laws. That is not the purpose.

     

SHRI N.K. PREMACHANDRAN :  Hon. Minister, you are absolutely wrong. Kindly withdraw the observation you have made – ignorance of the Member. Why am I ignorant? It is because of you, and the Government. You have circulated the Bill only today morning. How can we be well versed with the Bill? You are denying my right; you are denying me the knowledge of the contents of the Bill. And the Minister is saying that it is Member’s ignorance and a fault. Kindly withdraw that observation.

SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA: This is not happening for the first time. Tomorrow, the House is going to adjourn. We are only introducing the Bill and the Members would have enough time to go through the Bill before passing it. … (Interruptions)

PROF. SAUGATA ROY :  What is the hurry?

SHRI N.K. PREMACHANDRAN : Ahluwalia ji, kindly hear my third objection. Without hearing the third objection, he is saying this. I am not on a point of order. I am opposing the introduction of the Bill.

          Third is concerning the Gratuity Act. Hon. Minister has assured before the House and outside that the gratuity will be enhanced from Rs.10 lakh to Rs.20 lakh. He said that he is giving priority to that and that it will be brought in this very Session. That was the assurance. The Payment of Gratuity Act by which Rs.10 lakh will be enhanced to Rs.20 lakh and would benefit the workers. Those workers who are getting retrenched or retired will be losing the benefit because they would be getting the benefit only prospectively. When the Payment of Gratuity Act is to be amended so as to enhance the gratuity from Rs.10 lakh to Rs.20 lakh, the Government is  bringing a labour code Bill by which the right of the workers to get enhanced gratuity will also be infringed. Therefore, that is my third objection to introducing the Bill.

          These are the three major objections;  legislative competence is well there because Concurrent List is there, Article 72(2) is there. Hence, I am fully within the competence of my right to oppose this Bill. With these words, I conclude. Thank you very much. … (Interruptions)

   

SHRI BANDARU DATTATREYA: Hon. Member, a senior Member, is interested in the rights of the workers. I fully agree with him. … (Interruptions)

PROF. SAUGATA ROY :   Then, you withdraw the Bill. … (Interruptions)

SHRI BANDARU DATTATREYA: Regarding introduction of the Bill, he was mentioning three things. One is about 44 labour laws, which would be dealt with in four stages.

There are going to be four codes. One is the Code on Wages. This is the Bill that I am introducing. I will speak only about the intention of the Government about that. The Second National Labour Commission had given its Report in 2002 stating that all the labour laws should be tuned to the present-day time. That was in 2002 and now we are in 2017. This is related to only four Acts. One is about the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. Second one is about the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. The third one is the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The fourth one is the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976. These four Acts will be amalgamated into one Labour Code. My learned friend should understand that it is being done only for simplification, rationalisation and also doing away with the cumbersome process. I assure this House that no where the rights of the workers would be infringed. यह सभी वर्कर्स के हित में ही है। वर्कर्स के खिलाफ इसमें कुछ भी नहीं है। इसलिए मैं आपसे रिक्वेस्ट करता हूँ। आपने जो तीन बातें बताई हैं,इसमें वर्किंग कंडीशंस जिक्र का नहीं है। That is a separate part. Social security is a separate part. It is going to bring a historical change in the industrial arena. यह दुनिया के इतिहास में नंबर वन हो जाएगा। इसलिए हो जाएगा कि पहली बार देश में यूनिवर्सल मिनिमम वेज आएगा। अभी देश में संगठित और असंगठित मज़दूर हैं। चालीस करोड़ असंगठित मज़दूर हैं। There are about 40 crore unorganised workers. Now, with this Code, they may also be able to avail the universal minimum wage. It has a larger perspective.

I would request Shri Premachandranji, to go through this. … (Interruptions) Let me complete. I had a tripartite meeting. In the tripartite meetings, I convinced trade unions. Secondly, the Regional Conferences were attended to by the respective Labour Ministers and the Labour Secretaries from the respective States. It took two years for this process. I would also say that there will not be exploitation of workers. वर्कर्स का एक्स्प्लॉइटेशन कहीं भी नहीं होगा। उसका मिनिमम वेजिस,उसके पेमेंट ऑफ वेजिस एक्ट से मिलेगा। इसलिए अभी पहले मैं केवल इंट्रोडक्शन ही कर रहा हूँ। यह केवल इंट्रोडक्शन ही है। लेकिन बाद में मैं आपको समझाऊंगा। मुझे पूरा विश्वास है,मेरे मित्र प्रेमचंद्रन मेरे साथ बहुत अच्छे हैं,लेकिन ये हाऊस में थोड़ा अलग बात करते हैं,बाद में हमारे से अलग मिलते हैं। इसलिए मेरा अनुरोध है कि इससे एंंप्लॉयमेंट जनरेशन होने वाला है। Many new enterprises will come. देश में हमारे बहुत से नौजवान बेरोज़गारी से मर रहे हैं,उनको इससे बहुत से रोज़गार प्राप्त होंगे,नई इंडस्ट्रीज़ की सुविधा मिलेगी और मज़दूर के हित में होगा तो कृपा कर के आप लोग इस बिल को इंट्रोडय़ुज़ करने के लिए मुझे अनुमति दीजिए।

 

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is:

“That leave be granted to introduce a Bill to consolidate and amend the laws relating to wages and bonus and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.” The motion was adopted.

 

SHRI BANDARU DATTATREYA: I introduce the Bill.

   

*t69 Title: Introduction of the Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill, 2017.

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Members, before we take up introduction of the Finance Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill, 2017, I have to inform the House that Shri Arunt Jaitley, hon. Minister of Finance, vide communications dated 10th August, 2017 has informed that the President having been informed of the subject matter of the Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill, 2017, has recommended the introduction of the Bill in the Lok Sabha under the Article 171(1) and Article 274(1) and the consideration of the Bill under the Article 117(3) of the Constitution.

 

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS (SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL): On behalf of Shri Arun Jaitley, hon. Finance Minister, I rise to move for leave to introduce a Bill to provide for the resolution of certain categories of financial service providers in distress; the deposit insurance to consumers of certain categories of financial services; designation of systemically important financial institutions; and establishment of a Resolution Corporation for protection of consumer of specified service providers and of public funds for ensuring the stability and resilience of the financial system and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Motion moved:

“That leave be granted to introduce a Bill to provide for the resolution of certain categories of financial service providers in distress; the deposit insurance to consumers of certain categories of financial services; designation of systemically important financial institutions; and establishment of a Resolution Corporation for protection of consumer of specified service providers and of public funds for ensuring the stability and resilience of the financial system and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”   SHRI ADHIR RANJAN CHOWDHURY (BAHARAMPUR): The supercilious manner by which the Bill has been introduced is simply humiliating the Parliamentary system of our country. More often than not, this Government is trying to hoodwink the Parliamentary system of our country sometimes by resorting to ordinances. Again, in a supercilious and a cavalier manner, the Government has introduced the Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill, and I think that this kind of introduction certainly undermines our Parliamentary system. Therefore, I am opposing the introduction of the Bill in such a cavalier manner.

श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल : महोदय, इस सरकार की कोई ऐसी भावना नहीं है कि पार्लियामेन्टरी डेमोक्रेसी को हम कोई अंडरमाइन करें। अधीर रंजन चौधरी साहब, यह इन्ट्रोडक्शन के लिए है और यह प्रक्रिया है। 

श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : यह सप्लिमेन्टरी है।

 

 श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल : हाँ, सप्लिमेन्टरी है, यह स्पीकर का राइट है। बिजनेस रूल्स में लिखा हुआ है और सरकार का अधिकार है।...(व्यवधान)

श्री अधीर रंजन चौधरी : सब ठीक है। अधिकार है, ठीक है, लेकिन अधिकार किस तरीके से है?...(व्यवधान)

श्री अर्जुन राम मेघवाल : वह स्पीकर को राइट है।...(व्यवधान)यह स्पीकर को राइट है। यह बिल इन्ट्रोडक्शन के लिए है।...(व्यवधान)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is:

“That leave be granted to introduce a Bill to provide for the resolution of certain categories of financial service providers in distress; the deposit insurance to consumers of certain categories of financial services; designation of systemically important financial institutions; and establishment of a Resolution Corporation for protection of consumer of specified service providers and of public funds for ensuring the stability and resilience of the financial system and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.” The motion was adopted.

 

SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL: I introduce* the Bill.

     

*t70 Title: Motion regarding reference of Financial Resolution and Deposit Insurance Bill, 2017 to Joint Committee of both Houses.

 

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS (SHRI ARJUN RAM MEGHWAL): On behalf of Shri Arun Jaitley, hon. Minister of Finance, I beg to move:

“That the Bill to provide for the resolution of certain categories of financial service providers in distress; the deposit insurance to consumers of certain categories of financial services; designation of systemically important financial institution; and establishment of a Resolution Corporation for protection of consumers of specified service providers and of public funds for ensuring the stability and resilience of the financial system and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, be referred to a Joint Committee of the Houses consisting of 30 members, 20 from this House, namely:

 

1. Dr. Kirit Somaiya

2. Shri Gopal Chinayya Shetty

3. Shri Subhash Chandra Baheria

4. Shri Nishikant Dubey

5. Shri Shivkumar C. Udasi

6. Shri Anil Shirole

7. Shri Abhishek Singh

8. Shri Gajendra Singh Shekhawat

9. Shri Sanjay Jaiswal

10. Shri Jagdambika Pal

11. Shri Jayadev Galla

12. Shri Gajanan Chandrakant Kirtikar

13. Shri Chirag Paswan

14. Shri Gaurav Gogoi

15. Shri S.P. Muddahanumegowda

16. Dr. P. Venugopal

17. Prof. Saugata Roy

18. Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab

19. Shri Konda Vishweshwar Reddy

20. Shri P. Karunakaran and 10 members from Rajya Sabha;

 

that in order to constitute a sitting of the Joint Committee, the quorum shall be one-third of the total number of members of the Joint Committee;

 

that the Committee shall make a report to this House by the last day of the first week of the next Session;

 

that in other respects the Rules of Procedure of this House relating to Parliamentary Committees shall apply with such variations and modifications as the Speaker may make; and   that this House do recommend to Rajya Sabha that Rajya Sabha do join the said Joint Committee and communicate to this House the names of 10 members to be appointed by Rajya Sabha to the Joint Committee.”   HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Motion moved:

“That the Bill to provide for the resolution of certain categories of financial service providers in distress; the deposit insurance to consumers of certain categories of financial services; designation of systemically important financial institution; and establishment of a Resolution Corporation for protection of consumers of specified service providers and of public funds for ensuring the stability and resilience of the financial system and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, be referred to a Joint Committee of the Houses consisting of 30 members, 20 from this House, namely:

1. Dr. Kirit Somaiya

2. Shri Gopal Chinayya Shetty

3. Shri Subhash Chandra Baheria

4. Shri Nishikant Dubey

5. Shri Shivkumar C. Udasi

6. Shri Anil Shirole

7. Shri Abhishek Singh

8. Shri Gajendra Singh Shekhawat

9. Shri Sanjay Jaiswal

10. Shri Jagdambika Pal

11. Shri Jayadev Galla

12. Shri Gajanan Chandrakant Kirtikar

13. Shri Chirag Paswan

14. Shri Gaurav Gogoi

15. Shri S.P. Muddahanumegowda

16. Dr. P. Venugopal

17. Prof. Saugata Roy

18. Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab

19. Shri Konda Vishweshwar Reddy

20. Shri P. Karunakaran and 10 members from Rajya Sabha;

 

that in order to constitute a sitting of the Joint Committee, the quorum shall be one-third of the total number of members of the Joint Committee;

 

that the Committee shall make a report to this House by the last day of the first week of the next Session;

 

that in other respects the Rules of Procedure of this House relating to Parliamentary Committees shall apply with such variations and modifications as the Speaker may make; and   that this House do recommend to Rajya Sabha that Rajya Sabha do join the said Joint Committee and communicate to this House the names of 10 members to be appointed by Rajya Sabha to the Joint Committee.”   DR. A. SAMPATH (ATTINGAL): Why has no woman member been inducted in this Committee? … (Interruptions)

SHRIMATI P.K. SHREEMATHI TEACHER (KANNUR): There is no woman member even from the ruling party. … (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab, please speak.

 

SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB (CUTTACK): Hon. Deputy Speaker Sir, I have no objection to the introduction of this Bill as it was approved by the hon. Speaker in the Supplementary List of Business. But I object to the reference that has been made for formation of a Joint Committee and this is in sub-section C of this Supplementary List of Business which clearly states that it is to be taken up in case the Bill at Serial No. B is introduced. Therefore, I rise here to object to the formation of a Joint Parliamentary Committee.  You have a Joint Parliamentary Committee where the matter is very urgent, where there is some dissension between this House and the other House. When there is no consensus within the Parliament, you try to frame unanimity among various political parties so that you have a Joint Parliamentary Committee. The greater point is that the Bill will be brought for discussion and passing in both the Houses and the hidden agenda is that it will not get blocked in the Rajya Sabha. I would like to know what the agenda of the Government is. We have a Standing Committee on Finance which is empowered to go into this Bill and which is an all-party committee comprising members from Bhartiya Janta Party, Shiv Sena, Congress and other political parties. They will deliberate on that subject threadbare, clause by clause. Subsequently, after the report has come to the House, Parliament will deliberate as per the agenda that will be fixed. But I am still in doubt why there is apprehension in the Government that it may get blocked in Rajya Sabha. This is a very important Bill and it needs elaborate discussion and deliberation in the Committee on Finance. This Committee system is actually being relegated to the background by repeatedly forming Joint Parliamentary Committees. A Joint Parliamentary Committee is for an exigency. At a certain time, or at a certain point of difficulty, a Joint Parliamentary Committee is formed. It is not a practice but in this Government, during the last two years if not three years, we find that on any issue where there is an apprehension that certain Bills would get blocked in Rajya Sabha or get delayed in Rajya Sabha, a Select Committee is formed in the Rajya Sabha or a Joint Parliamentary Committee. Therefore, I would like to be educated by the hon. Minister about the necessity for having a Joint Parliamentary Committee.

          The Finance Committee is there. Why do you not have faith on the Finance Committee? It seems that you do not have that much of confidence on the Standing Committee on Finance and so you are insisting for a Joint Parliamentary Committee. It is a different matter that Prof. Saugata Roy is a Member of the Finance Committee and also a Member of this JPC; Shri Nishikant Dubey is a Member of the Finance Committee and also a Member of this JPC; Dr. Kirit Somaiya is Member of the Finance Committee and also a Member of this JPC.

          Leaving aside that, why do you have a JPC and why not the Standing Committee on Finance? This needs to be clarified.

 

PROF. SAUGATA ROY (DUM DUM): The rule, as far as the motions after introduction of Bills and scope of debate are concerned, is quite clear. Rule 74 states:

“When a Bill is introduced or on some subsequent occasion, the member in charge may make one of the following motions in regard to one’s own Bill, namely:—  

(i) that it be taken into consideration; or

(ii) that it be referred to a Select Committee of the House; or

(iii) that it be referred to a Joint Committee of the Houses with the concurrence of the Council; or

(iv) that it be circulated for the purpose of eliciting opinion thereon:

 

Provided that no such motion as is referred to in clause (iii) shall be made with reference to a Bill [if it contains only provisions dealing with all or any of the matters specified in sub-clauses (a) to (g) of clause (1) of article 110 of the Constitution]: ”             Here, the Minister is referring it to a Joint Parliamentary Committee under rule 74 (3). My esteemed colleague Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab had explained in detail how the whole principle of Standing Committee is being circumvented, superseded, and bypassed by the Government in its quest to get majority in both Houses. The same thing actually happened in the case of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. When that Bill was brought here, I objected tooth and nail saying it should not be passed. The Government felt that it would not get a majority in the Rajya Sabha. It sent it to a Joint Parliamentary Committee, the fear being that it would not be passed in the Rajya Sabha but if the Joint Parliamentary Committee presents the Report both Houses get morally bound by it. In the whole process, we are weakening the foundation of the Standing Committee system.

          It is normally the practice that any legislation concerning any Ministry or any Department is automatically referred to a Standing Committee. Unless it is a small amendment or a trivial amendment, any Bill of a substantial nature is referred to the Standing Committee. As our esteemed colleague Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab has so eloquently stated, that process should not be give a go-by.

          We have no complaint about the personnel of the Committee because we are ourselves Members of both the Committees. We are conscious of the power of the Standing Committee. We have a Finance Committee headed by Dr. M. Veerappa Moily, which has given important Reports on most of the matters. Why should that Standing Committee be bypassed or be overridden by the Government’s desire to bring in a Bill?

          Let us also look at how the Bills are coming. On the penultimate day, you are bringing a Bill and then a motion, without any scope for discussion.

          On the earlier Bill our esteemed colleague Shri Premachandran spoke eloquently on how he had no time to study the Bill so that proper opposition to the introduction of the Bill can be made.  You are sitting in the Chair, Sir, and you have a long parliamentary experience.  Please see that the niceties of the parliamentary behaviour are maintained by the Government.  If the Chair does not protect us then who will protect the House or the Constitution or the Rules?  That is why we seek refuge in your infinite powers from the Chair to support us.  Thank you, Sir.      

 

SHRIMATI P.K. SHREEMATHI TEACHER (KANNUR): Sir, the hon. Minister has proposed the names of 20 hon. Members for the Joint Parliamentary Committee but we do not see a single woman Member in that list.… (Interruptions) There are a number of experienced women sitting on the Treasury Benches.… (Interruptions) Please let me speak.

          There are a number of experienced and learned women Members sitting on the Treasury Benches.  I would say that though we have only 10 per cent women MPs in the House, how can the Government take this anti-women stand?  This is an anti-women stand and you should also support me because this message will go to the nation.  All the people, the women are looking to the Parliament.  They will ask where are the names of women in this list?  The Government, the ruling party should be the role model.  A majority of the women MPs are on the treasury side.  So, my request to the Government and to the hon. Minister would be to include at least one woman in the proposed list of the JPC.  You can say that just for the sake of medicine, you include one woman MP from the Lok Sabha to serve as a Member of the Joint Parliamentary Committee.  Thank you, Sir.                              

     

SHRI N.K. PREMACHANDRAN (KOLLAM): Sir, I fully support the observations made by Shri Mahtab as well as Prof. Saugata Roy with regard to referring this Bill to the Joint Select Committee.  I would also like to draw the attention of the hon. Chair to the fact that this Bill is referred to the Joint Select Committee by virtue of Rule 74, clause 3.   If you refer to clause 3, there is a proviso which says that the Bill should be circulated two days prior to the date of sending it to the Standing Committee or sending it to the Joint Select Committee or to any other Committee.  That mandatory provision is there but the hon. Speaker has given the permission and hence it is okay.  Definitely, the other question is that Rule 75 will be applicable here.  Kindly see Rule 75, clause (1).

          This is the introduction stage of the Bill and to my information the preliminary discussion is the first reading of the Bill.  As per the first reading of the Bill, Rule 75 (1) gives authority, empowers the Members to have a discussion on the principles of the Bill.  Not on the merits of the Bill but on the principle of the Bill we have a right to discuss it.  Unfortunately, I may repeat that this Bill was circulated today by 9.00 o’clock in the morning when I was coming to the Parliament.  Prof. Saugata Roy has rightly said that we are not in a position to have a look into the Bill and, therefore, we are not able to discuss the principles of the Bill as per the Rule 75 (1). 

Under these circumstances, I oppose this move of the Government.  I also support Madam, Shreemathi Teacher and appeal to all the political parties, not only the Treasury Benches, to have a woman representative in the proposed Committee.  Thank you, Sir. 

           

THE MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (SHRI S.S. AHLUWALIA): Hon. Deputy Speaker, Sir, my learned friends Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab, Prof. Saugata Roy and Shri N.K. Premachandran raised certain issues about the formation of the Joint Committee on a particular Bill. Madam Teacher has also raised an issue. She has not objected to the formation of the Committee, but she is objecting as to why there is no woman member. It is better to talk to Shri P.Karunakaran as to why he has not given your name in that.

          My simple point is this.  Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab raised a point that it can be referred to the Standing Committee also. He is not per se objecting the referring the Bill to a Committee, but to not to a Joint Committee. Then, he has shown that the Government is apprehensive of something. He is talking about some hidden agenda. There is no hidden agenda. The agenda is very clear that when we are talking about bringing legislation in the country, we are bringing new legislations for future generation and these are new generation future laws. This law is also a new law. Rather I will say that when it is sent to any Committee, it gives more leverage to the members to get more exposure and to get more in depth knowledge about the Bill while talking to the stakeholders and Government officials. But, there is a difference between the Departmentally Related Standing Committees and the Joint Committees. Rather he should feel happy that a Government Bill, which has been introduced and referred to the Joint Committee, now he has got the power to change the total character of the Bill. It is because the recommendations of the Departmentally Related Standing Committees are not mandatory. But, here it is mandatory. Here, your recommendations are mandatory in nature and ultimately, the Government is bound to accept those recommendations.

SHRI BHARTRUHARI MAHTAB : Hon. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the hon. Minister is very intelligent enough. The Committee’s list itself demonstrates this. The number of members in this Committee is always in the side of the Ruling Party. Any change, if I suggest, will be voted out. But, in a Standing Committee, the suggestions can get reflected in the Report for the consumption of others.

SHRI NISHIKANT DUBEY (GODDA): I object to it. कोई भी कमेटी पार्टी के निर्णय पर काम नहीं करती है। महताब जी,आप आठ साल से काम कर रहे हैं। हम लोगों ने ज्वाइंट कमेटी में भी बात की है।  

श्री भर्तृहरि महताब : मेरा अमेंडमेंट पिछली ज्वाइंट कमेटी में कोई भी एक्सेप्ट नहीं हुआ। ये सब वोटिड आउट हो जाते हैं।

श्री निशिकान्त दुबे :  सरकार कोई इंस्ट्रक्शन नहीं देती है। किसी मैम्बर को आज तक किसी सरकार ने इंस्ट्रक्शन नहीं दी।

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Please, now the hon. Minister will reply.

श्री भर्तृहरि महताब : यह आपकी पार्टी का बड़प्पन है। मैं स्वीकार करता हूं,लेकिन हमारे जो अमेंडमेंट होते हैं,वोटिड आउट हो जाते हैं।

 श्री एस.एस.अहलुवालिया :  ऐसा नहीं है। आप देखिए,जब भी किसी पार्टी की सरकार आती है,पार्टी की सरकार के आने का मूल कारण होता है कि लोकसभा में किसका बहुमत है,बहुमत के हिसाब से ही इस समिति के सदस्यों का चयन होता है। चाहे वह स्टैंडिंग कमेटी हो,चाहे ज्वाइंट पार्लियामेंटरी कमेटी हो,चाहे ज्वाइंट कमेटी हो या सलैक्ट कमेटी हो,उसमें रूपरेखा ऐसे ही बनती है। मुद्दा यह होता है कि आपके सुझाव,जो डिपार्टमेंट रिलेटिड स्टैंडिंग कमेटी में आते हैं,वह सरकार मान भी सकती है और नहीं भी मान सकती है। किंतु,यहां उसे मानना ही पड़ता है क्योंकि आप पूरे बिल का रूप बदल सकते हैं,आपको यह अधिकार है। आपको ज्यादा लिवरेज दिया जा रहा है कि आप इस पर चर्चा कीजिए और सरकारी पक्ष के सदस्यों को अपने साथ जोड़कर समझा सकते हैं कि ऐसे नहीं,ऐसे लिखा जाना चाहिए,तो मेरे ख्याल से उसे माना जाता है,इसलिए इस मोशन को पास किया जाए।

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is:

“That the Bill to provide for the resolution of certain categories of financial service providers in distress; the deposit insurance to consumers of certain categories of financial services; designation of systemically important financial institution; and establishment of a Resolution Corporation for protection of consumers of specified service providers and of public funds for ensuring the stability and resilience of the financial system and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto, be referred to a Joint Committee of the Houses consisting of 30 members, 20 from this House, namely:

 

1. Dr. Kirit Somaiya

2. Shri Gopal Chinayya Shetty

3. Shri Subhash Chandra Baheria

4. Shri Nishikant Dubey

5. Shri Shivkumar C. Udasi

6. Shri Anil Shirole

7. Shri Abhishek Singh

8. Shri Gajendra Singh Shekhawat

9. Shri Sanjay Jaiswal

10. Shri Jagdambika Pal

11. Shri Jayadev Galla

12. Shri Gajanan Chandrakant Kirtikar

13. Shri Chirag Paswan

14. Shri Gaurav Gogoi

15. Shri S.P. Muddahanumegowda

16. Dr. P. Venugopal

17. Prof. Saugata Roy

18. Shri Bhartruhari Mahtab

19. Shri Konda Vishweshwar Reddy

20. Shri P. Karunakaran and 10 members from Rajya Sabha;

 

that in order to constitute a sitting of the Joint Committee, the quorum shall be one-third of the total number of members of the Joint Committee;

 

that the Committee shall make a report to this House by the last day of the first week of the next Session;

 

that in other respects the Rules of Procedure of this House relating to Parliamentary Committees shall apply with such variations and modifications as the Speaker may make; and   that this House do recommend to Rajya Sabha that Rajya Sabha do join the said Joint Committee and communicate to this House the names of 10 members to be appointed by Rajya Sabha to the Joint Committee.”   The motion was adopted         *t71 Title: Regarding disinvestment of BEML.

HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The House will now take up `Zero Hour’.

          Shri K. H. Muniyappa.

SHRI K.H. MUNIYAPPA (KOLAR): Mr. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise the issue of disinvestment of M/s BEML in my constituency in Bengaluru, Palakkad and Mysore. The process of disinvestment of BEML was started during the time of the last Government. During that period a delegation from BEML under my leadership along with the Trade Union leaders of BEML and leaders belonging to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes met and discussed the subject with the then hon. Defence Minister, Shri A.K. Antony ji. After a prolonged discussion, the hon. Minister assured that BEML will not be disinvested beyond 49 per cent in toto, Government will hold 51 per cent shares and will have full control over the administration of BEML.

          In this context, I met former Defence Minister, Shri Manohar Parrikar ji along with Shri Ananth Kumar ji, the hon. Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and a delegation of BEML employees’ union leaders of these three units. During the discussion the then Defence Minister also assured that BEML will not be disinvested since the company is continuously making profits and also it comes under the Ministry of Defence. 

          Now the present Government has announced the strategic sale of 26 per cent of its share in addition to 46 per cent which has already been sold. In that case the Government will lose its control over the administration of BEML and the company will go in private hands. It is understood that the hon. Minister has replied in the Parliament that the assets of BEML is around only Rs. 500 crore which is not correct, rather the approximate value of the company is around Rs. 65000 crore in these three units.

          In KGF the BEML has come into existence as an alternative industry to the closed Bharat Gold Mines Limited. This is the only Public Sector Company in the whole district. It is a reserved constituency. The total number of employees of BEML is around 9000 and above and all these people are working very hard. Since its inception 52 years ago, except for one year, the company has made a profit. Once upon a time this company was a Navaratna company. Employees of the company are sitting on a dharna for two days, that is, on the 9th and 10th August at Jantar Mantar.

          The company has stake in three very vital areas, namely, mining and construction, Defence business and Rail and metro. The company has helped in the development of infrastructure of the country. The company has indigenised all the equipment and caters to the needs of Coal India and construction companies, bridge construction etc. The company has manufactured world class coaches, wagons and metro coaches for Indian Railways and metro rail. Many equipment are used in Defence, vehicles, Armed Recovery vehicles, missile launchers, battle tanks, hauls, mine plough, snow cutters, aircraft towing tractors etc. BEML has paid a dividend of around Rs. 900 crore to the Government exchequer. BEML has contributed around Rs. 6500 crore directly and indirectly in the form of tax to the Government.

          Under the circumstances, this Public Sector has earned a profit right from its inception except for one year. Therefore, I would like to urge upon the Government that since it was decided in the last Cabinet that BEML will not be disinvested and keeping the interest of the country in view and also since its involved in Defence equipment production, this company should not be disinvested. I would like to request the Government to protect this industry and should not be disinvested.

HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri S.P. Muddahanume Gowda, Shri Mullappally Ramchandran, Adv. Joice George, Shrimati P.K. Sreemathi Teacher, Shri M. B. Rajesh, Dr. A. Sampath are permitted to associate with the issue raised by Shri K.H. Muniyappa. 

       

*t72 Title: Shri Deepender Singh Hooda and Smt. Kirron Anupam Kher made a submission regarding alleged injustice meted out to the stalking victim  due  to negligence of  Chandigarh police in taking timely  action.

 

श्री दीपेद्र सिंह हुड्डा (रोहतक) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, आपने महिला सम्मान से जुड़ा हुआ एक महत्वपूर्ण मुद्दा उठाने की मुझे अनुमति दी है।

          यह मुद्दा बहुचर्चित वर्णिका कुंडु मामले का है। चण्डीगढ़ में यह जो घटना घटित हुई, जिसमें एक महिला का दो लड़कों ने गाड़ी से पीछा किया, जबरन गाड़ी रुकवाकर, जबर्दस्ती उसकी गाड़ी की खिड़की खोलने का प्रयास हुआ। पूरे देश के सामने यह मामला आया। जब यह मामला आया, उसके बाद जिस तरह की कार्रवाई हुई, कुछ पक्षपात की बातें उत्पन्न हुईं कि पहले उतनी धाराएंं लगाई गयीं, फिर उनको हटा दिया गया।  डीएसपी के अलग-अलग दो बयान आए, थाने के अंदर जिस तरह से खातिरदारी की गयी, इन सभी बातों को लेकर प्रश्न उठे। सीसीटीवी कैमरे की जो फुटेज उपलब्ध हो पाई, उनको लेकर संशय हुआ, लेकिन कल चण्डीगढ़ पुलिस ने दोबारा इस केस की इनक्वायरी को आगे बढ़ाते हुए कार्रवाई की है। आरोपी को गिरफ्तार किया गया है और उस पर धाराएंं लगाई गयी हैं।

          मैं आपके माध्यम से तीन बातें सरकार से कहना चाहूंगा। यह बहुत महत्वपूर्ण एवं संवेदनशील मुद्दा है और आज पूरे देश का ध्यान इस मुद्दे पर है। पहला कदम चण्डीगढ़ पुलिस ने जरूर बढ़ाया है, मगर इसकी जांच को जब तक न्यायसंगत निऐकऐाऩ तक लेकर नहीं जाते, तब तक सरकार और प्रशासन पर पूरे देश की नजर रहेगी। इस मामले में जब न्याय होगा, तभी देश में ऐसा संदेश जाएगा कि कानून सबके लिए बराबर है। इस मामले में न्याय मांगने के लिए मैं खड़ा हुआ हूं। हम न्याय से ज्यादा कोई मांग नहीं कर रहे हैं, हमें न्याय से ज्यादा कुछ नहीं चाहिए, मगर न्याय से कम भी देश स्वीकार नहीं करेगा। अगर कहीं ढिलाई हुई या निऐपक्षता में कमी आई तो देश दोबारा उसी तरह उठ खड़ा होगा, जैसे पहले खड़ा हुआ था। ...(व्यवधान)अब सरकार ने दोबारा वे धाराएंं लगाई हैं,इसका अर्थ है कि सरकार ने यह स्वीकार किया है कि प्रारम्भिक जांच में कोई न कोई चूक हुई है। वह चूक कैसे हुई,किन अधिकारियों ने की है?क्या उन पर कोई दबाव था?सरकार को इन बातों का जवाब देना चाहिए।  ...(व्यवधान)मैं एक बात और कहना चाहूंगा।  ...(व्यवधान)जब एसडीएम द्वारा पीड़िता का धारा 164 का बयान हुआ।  ...(व्यवधान)

श्री गणेश सिंह (सतना) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय,यह राज्य का विऐाय है। वहां कार्रवाई हो रही है।...(व्यवधान)

श्री दीपेद्र सिंह हुड्डा : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, उस बयान के समय कोई महिला अधिकारी नहीं थी। आज सरकार की ओर से पूरे देश में ऐसा निर्देश जाए, ताकि ऐसे संवेदनशील मामलों में विश्वास का माहौल बने। ...(व्यवधान) Let me finish it as it is an important issue. सर,अगर मैं कोई राजनीतिक बात करूं,तो आप उसे काट दीजिए।  ...(व्यवधान)    Sir, I am not raising any political point. Let me finish it as it is an important issue.

HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER:  It is not a debate.    

श्री दीपेद्र सिंह हुड्डा : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, ऐसा निर्देश पूरे देश में जाए कि अगर ऐसी कोई पीड़िता सामने आती है और जब उसका बयान लिया जाए तो पुरूऐा अधिकारी के साथ महिला अधिकारी भी उपस्थित हों। सरकार की ओर से ऐसा निर्देश पूरे देश में जाना चाहिए। ...(व्यवधान)एक बात सामने आई है कि जैसे ही यह मामला सामने आया,कुछ लोगों ने पीड़िता का चरित्रहनन करने का काम सोशल मीडिया पर शुरू कर दिया। उनकी पुरानी तस्वीरें दिखाई गयीं और कहा गया कि आरोपियों के साथ उनकी तस्वीरें हैं,जबकि उन पुरानी तस्वीरों में आरोपी नहीं थी और वे तस्वीरें फेक पाई गयीं।...(व्यवधान)इस तरह से पीड़िता का जो चरित्रहनन किया गया। ...(व्यवधान)

          Sir, I will speak in English also so that you can understand.  There is a slander of the character of the victim who had come forward to speak. 

          The social media has slandered her character and this has become a trend which needs to be stopped.  It is so not just in this case. Rising above political lines, if a victim comes forward for a complaint, something needs to be done against the people who question her character, who put her old and fake pictures by questioning her character.  They are questioning as to what she was doing at 12 o’clock at night. One person asked as to what she was doing at 12 0’clock. My question is, what was the boy doing at 12 0’clock?  Why do we not ask that question? 

          Let me complete.  I am not raising any political issue.  The entire nation is watching.  I am not saying any political point….(Interruptions)  The people who have resorted to character assassination need to be booked under appropriate sections of the IT Act. 

          One of the spokespersons of the BJP made a tweet and later on said that her account was hacked.  One Minister of the BJP had tweeted something which is highly objectionable. One person of the BJP has said, ‘What was she doing at 12 o’clock? I will make my last point and conclude. They asked as to what was she doing at 12 o’clock. Is there a rule in this country that a woman cannot go out after a certain time? If there is a rule in this country, they should specify that time. If there is a rule, we should be made aware महिलाओं को सुरक्षा प्रदान करने की जिम्मेदारी सरकार की होती है। ...(व्यवधान)  It is not your responsibility to ask the woman. … (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri M.B. Rajesh, Adv. Joice George and Shri Bhagwant Mann are allowed to associate with the matter raised by Shri Deepender Hooda.

   

SHRIMATI KIRRON KHER (CHANDIGARH):  Thank you very much Sir for allowing me to speak. … (Interruptions) I did not interrupt you. Sit down now. Enough Shri Deepender Hooda, do not politicize it. … (Interruptions)

          I would like to thank the Chandigarh police for their very prompt action in saving this girl and for the PCR arriving at the spot the minute she called.  I would like to thank them for this. The people who are criticizing this must also realize that there is a procedure to the investigation. When this girl was giving her statement in front of the Magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC she did not mention the word ‘abduction’. The police was forced to drop that charge. Then, they found the CCTV footage. They got the witnesses. They did all that. They themselves had sent the girl for recording her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC. … (Interruptions) The hon. Home Minister Shri Rajnath Singh gave clear instructions to the officers, to the Governor and to the Home Secretary saying no political pressure should be entertained, no phone calls and do what is right. I myself have spoken against stalking in this very House four days ago. I myself as a woman, as a mother, and as the hon. lady Member of Chandigarh have stood up for the rights of the girl.  I have criticized voices that have said, ‘What was the girl doing outside at 12?’ Let us not have selective amnesia. I do not want to politicize this issue. It is a social problem. It is not just in my party or your party. It is there across the party lines.  You need to remember all the old instances and the statements of the Coal Minister, of the J.D.(U) President, of the Samajwadi Party President, who have made sexist and misogynous remarks about women when the Bill for stalking was brought in Parliament.

          I have a suggestion to make to those people who say, ‘girls should not be allowed at night’.  Firstly do not make excuses that it is an old photo. So what if it is a new photo? What is wrong in a girl going out at night? What is wrong in a girl having a drink or enjoying her life with people? You see there are different societal norms. There is a progressive India and there is a very regressive India. We do not as a party ever talk against the rights of women. … (Interruptions) I just want to say one line.

          I think that ‘girls should not be allowed to go out at nights’ is a wrong concept. It is the boys going out at night are causing the problem. So, boys should not be allowed to go out at night and girls could go at any time. … (Interruptions) Thank you for letting me speak.

HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Dr. Manoj Rajoria, Kunwar Pushpendra Singh Chandel and Shri Bhairon Prasad Mishra are allowed to associate with the matter raised by Shrimati Kirron Kher.

     

THE MINISTER OF CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS  AND MINISTER OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (SHRI ANANTHKUMAR): Sir, the dignity and honour of every woman of this country is sacrosanct. There is no question about it. It is the duty of all the Governments under the Constitution of India to protect and to safeguard the life, honour and modesty of a woman. At the same time, in this case of Chandigarh, the Government as well as the police has taken prompt action. Immediately, the rule of law has taken its course and we have full confidence that whoever has committed any wrong will be punished. There will be no let off.

          At the same time, I urge upon our friends of the Congress Party that they should not politicize this issue. I would also urge upon them that it is a sensitive issue. When the Chandigarh Administration is taking prompt action, they should not colour it in a political manner. Shri Deepender Singh Hooda is an esteemed colleague. He understands the severity and seriousness of the matter. When our hon. Member Shrimati Kirron Kher, who is a woman Member of Parliament representing Chandigarh Constituency is on her legs and putting forth the facts before the House, I expect Venugopalji, Deepender Singh Hoodaji and all our esteemed colleagues to lend their ears to her submission also because that is a view point. She is also presenting the facts as she was there all through when the entire incident happened.

          So, I assure the House that law will take its course and the Government is taking appropriate action. Even the victim, who has complained, has, in the beginning, appreciated the prompt action taken by the police and the administration.

 

SHRI DUSHYANT CHAUTALA (HISAR): Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I also want to speak on this matter.

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: It is not a discussion. I will allow you to raise your issue later.

… (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: I will call you afterwards. Please wait.

       

*t73 Title: Regarding providng single window clearance for foreign film productions.

SHRIMATI HEMAMALINI (MATHURA): Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, my subject is totally different from what is being discussed right now.

          Sir, my subject is about providing Single Window Clearance for foreign film productions. As an artiste I have been in Indian cinema for a very long time. So, I choose to address a most relevant issue today concerning film shoots in our country.

          Our country India has beautiful, exotic locations, historic and heritage sites and beautiful ancient cities which are being shot by Hollywood film makers very beautifully that we have seen in many films. Film industries world over, especially Hollywood, have always been attracted to India as the most popular destination for film shoots. But the number of foreign films to be shot in India is reduced considerably in the recent past. The reason for this is, in India film makers, especially Indian film makers and also foreign film makers face location delays for permission to shoot at roads, airports, railways or helicopter shots of the city. Even after getting all the required permissions from different Ministries, on the ground they face problems with local police and local municipal corporations and have to necessarily pay bribes to keep a film shoot running smoothly.

          Foreign film productions have always been a source of earning foreign exchange and providing employment to our own people. Foreign film productions also encourage the local talents and our Indian rich culture to go main stage at the global level. It also promotes tourism in our country. But the kind of time and resources wasted in getting so many permits is one of the main reasons for less people exploring India as a prospective shooting destination.

          So, I would like to suggest to the Government to introduce a Single Window Clearance as this will not only help foreign films but also our own Indian film productions that face a lot of issues in getting permits and other registrations done when it comes to location shoots. I do hope that the Ministry concerned would take positive steps to ensure ease and facilitate a large number of international brands and foreign film production houses to shoot in India.  Thank you so much.

HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shri Sharad Tripathi, Shri Satyapal Singh, Kunwar Pushpendra Singh Chandel and Shri Gopal Shetty are permitted to associate with the issue raised by Shrimati Hemamalini.

     

*t74 Title: Regarding exempting State of Tamil Nadu from NEET.

SHRI K.N. RAMACHANDRAN (SRIPERUMBUDUR): Sir, I am going to raise a very important  and serious issue relating to the medical students of our Tamil Nadu State. Thousands of such students are in panic.  The introduction of NEET has created a huge uproar in Tamil Nadu.  Many pertinent questions have been raised.  Our beloved leader, whom we still believe our God, Pratchi Thalaivi Amma had categorically opposed the introduction of NEET as it was a direct infringement of the rights of the State, which would cause grave injustice to the students of Tamil Nadu. Apart from it, Education is in the Concurrent List.

          The Government of Tamil Nadu had established many Government Medical Colleges. As compared to other States, our State of Tamil Nadu has a lot more number of medical colleges across the State in order to achieve the optimum doctor-patient ratio and to augment its medical service infrastructure.  But if these seats are taken away by the students of other States through NEET, it will create non-availability of doctors and medical services, particularly in rural Tamil Nadu.

          Sir, keeping this in view,   the Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly has passed two Bills for protecting the existing admission policy for UG and PG admissions in the Medical and Dental Colleges.  The two Bills have been sent to the Government of India for obtaining the Assent of the President of India under article 254(2) of the Constitution of India.

          With a view to protecting the prospects of the State Board students and to provide them fair and equal opportunity, the Government of Tamil Nadu  has taken a policy decision to continue with the existing system of admission to Government Medical and Dental Colleges and also to preserve  the doctor-patient ratio in Tamil Nadu, especially in the rural areas and villages where the doctors who are well versed in Tamil language alone can treat the local population.

          In this situation, I would strongly urge the Government of India to exempt the State of Tamil Nadu from NEET. The Presidential Assent  for the two Bills may be accorded immediately to enable the Government of Tamil Nadu to continue with its decades old  existing system of admission to Government Medical and Dental Colleges.

          Thank you, Sir.

HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Shrimati V. Sathyabama and Shrimati M. Vasanthi are permitted to associate with the issue raised by Shri K.N. Ramachandran.

SHRI P.R. SUNDARAM (NAMAKKAL): Hon. Deputy-Speaker, Sir, the whole nation is shocked to know that the…*    HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER:  No names will go on record.

SHRI P.R. SUNDARAM (NAMAKKAL): It was also confirmed on the part of senior jail authorities that …*      HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: No names will go on record.

…(Interruptions)…*    HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Allegations will not go on record.

…(Interruptions)…*   HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Nothing will go on record.

…(Interruptions)…*         *t75 Title: Regarding alleged attempt of kidnapping of a girl.

श्री दुऐयंत चौटाला (हिसार) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय, मैं किरण खेर जी का आभार प्रकट करना चाहता हूं कि इस पूरे मामले पर उन्होंने बहुत अच्छी तरह से सरकार का पक्ष रखा। यह एक गम्भीर विऐाय है क्योंकि हरियाणा की धरती से ूबेटी बचाओ, बेटी पढ़ाओ ू अभियान शुरू किया जाता है, वहीं एक ऐसा मामला आता है, जहां बेटी डराओ, बेटी उठाओ का वाकया चंडीगढ़ की सड़क पर देखते हैं। यह कोई पहला मामला नहीं है। मैं आपके संज्ञान में लाना चाहूंगा कि 8 मई को भारतीय जनता पार्टी के प्रदेश अध्यक्ष के भतीजे ने एक नाबालिग लड़की को किडनैप करने का काम टुहाणा में किया गया...(व्यवधान)और पुलिस को प्रेशराइज करके उस लड़की को दबाया गया...(व्यवधान)आज हमारी बेटियों को डराने का काम किया जा रहा है...(व्यवधान)*… HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Nothing will go in record.  

… (Interruptions)…  * श्री दुऐयंत चौटाला : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय,यह बहुत गम्भीर विऐाय है और मैं चाहूंगा कि सरकार इसकी विस्तृत इनक्वारी करवाए कि क्यों सीसीटीवी फुटेज रिमूव हुई,क्यों वहां से कैमरों की फुटेज लाने में डिले हुआ,क्यों सेक्शन 365 (5)(11) हटाए गए? 

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Nothing will go in record.

          Shri K.C. Venugopal.

 … (Interruptions)…*                *t76 Title: Regarding allegation of corruption and bribery charge against some political leaders of Kerala.

SHRI K.C. VENUGOPAL (ALAPPUZHA): Thank you, Sir. I am raising a serious issue.  It is of allegation of corruption and bribery charge against some political leaders of Kerala.… (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have already said. Whatever Shri Dushyant Chautala has said will not go in record.

… (Interruptions)…*     SHRI K.C. VENUGOPAL:  …*(Interruptions)  This is a very serious scam involving many …  (Interruptions)  It is the internal investigation of BJP.  They themselves mentioned this tip of the ice burg. … (Interruptions) They are trying to hide this very serious allegation only because of the internal rivalry in the party. … (Interruptions)

          As per the information in the report, the money was transferred to the middlemen in Delhi through havala transactions.… (Interruptions) It is not clear who received the money in Delhi.  Sir, we should know as to who has received the money in Delhi. … (Interruptions) This is a very serious matter. … (Interruptions)

On the one hand the Government is saying that they are taking brave steps against havala and black money and on the other hand their own party….… (Interruptions)

 

THE MINISTER OF CHEMICALS AND FERTILIZERS  AND MINISTER OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (SHRI ANANTHKUMAR): Sir, this is the same issue of  Kerala.… (Interruptions) There is some political party which has come out very clean. … (Interruptions) These are under investigation.… (Interruptions)

SHRI K.C. VENUGOPAL: This is a havala issue. This is a big issue.… (Interruptions) His internal party enquiry.… (Interruptions)

SHRI ANANTHKUMAR: No, nothing has happened.… (Interruptions) How can it be a big issue?… (Interruptions) No, Sir. The entire thing that he has spoken against the Bhartiya Janta Party leaders should be expunged.… (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Any allegation would not go on record.

… (Interruptions)* …    SHRI ANANTHKUMAR: It should be expunged.  It is a wild allegation. … (Interruptions) He is not only misleading the House but also the entire nation. … (Interruptions)

SHRI K.C. VENUGOPAL : Sir, on the one hand the Government is saying that they are taking action against havala and black money and on the other hand their own internal enquiry revealed that the havala money came to Delhi. … (Interruptions) Who is taking the money in Delhi?… (Interruptions)

SHRI ANANTHKUMAR: Sir, he should not be allowed to impose such a wild allegation.… (Interruptions) It is totally baseless. … * (Interruptions)

SHRI K.C. VENUGOPAL : …*  This is a serious allegation.  For getting a medical college, havala money is transferred.  It should be investigated.… (Interruptions) On the one hand the Government is saying that they are taking action against havala …  *.… (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Dr. A. Sampath, Shrimati P.K. Shreemathi Teacher and Adv. Joice George are permitted to associate with the issue raised by Shri K.C. Venugopal.

       

*t77 Title: Regarding reinstating the jobs of workers who were removed from their jobs due to demonetisation.

श्री गणेश सिंह (सतना) : उपाध्यक्ष महोदय,मैं भारत सरकार के माननीय उद्योग मंत्री तथा श्रम मंत्री जी का ध्यान आकृऐट कराना चाहता हूं। विमुद्रीकरण के बहाने निजी क्षेत्र के छोटे-बड़े उद्योगों ने बड़ी संख्या में ठेके के मजदूरों,बदली श्रमिकों तथा स्थायी श्रमिकों की सेवाएंं समाप्त कर दी हैं। इतना ही नहीं स्टाफ में भी बड़ी संख्या में छंटनी की गयी है,जबरदस्ती वीआरएस दिया जा रहा है। मैं जिस क्षेत्र से आता हूं,वहां सीमेंट के बड़े उद्योग हैं,जिसमें बिरला सीमेंट,मैहर सीमेंट,रिलायंस सीमेंट,प्रीज्म सीमेंट,केजेएस सीमेंट,जेपी बाबूपुर सीमेंट,नोवस्ता सीमेंट,जेपी बेला सीमेंट,जेपी बघवार,एसीसी सीमेंट,कैमोर,डायमंड सीमेंट,दमोह,यूनिवर्सल केबिल्स,सतना,डागा ऑयल मिल तथा कई इंजीनियरिंग कम्पनियों ने हजारों की संख्या में श्रमिकों को हटा दिया है। मैं भारत सरकार के श्रम मंत्रालय एवं उद्योग मंत्रालय का ध्यान आकृऐट कराते हुए उनसे मांग करता हूं कि विमुद्रीकरण के बाद अब तक कितने श्रमिकों को कार्य से हटाया गया?उसका विवरण मांगा जाए तथा उन्हें वापस रखने हेतु आदेश दिया जाए।

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Kunwar Pushpendra Singh Chandel, Shri Sharad Tripathi and Shri Bhairon Prasad Mishra are permitted to associate with the issue raised by Shri Ganesh Singh.

Now, it is six o’clock.  If the House agrees, we can continue with the ‘Zero Hour’.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI ANANTHKUMAR: Sir, we can adjourn the House. … (Interruptions)

HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: The House stands adjourned to meet on Friday, the 11th August, 2017 at 11.00 a.m. 18.00 hours The Lok Sabha then adjourned till Eleven of the Clock on Friday, August 11, 2017 / Shravana 20, 1939 (Saka).

     

*र्ड्ढ म्श्र्द अ थ्ठ्ठद्धत्ड्ढड्ड ठ्ठडदृड्ढ य्ड्ढ दठ्ठथ्ड्ढ दृढ  ठ्ठ ड्ढथ्र्डड्ढद्ध त्दड्डत्हठ्ठद्ड्ढद्म् य्ठ्ठद्य् य्ड्ढ घ्द्वड्ढद्य्त्दृद ध्ठ्ठद्म् ठ्ठहद्द्वठ्ठथ्न्र् ठ्ठत्ड्ढड्ड दृद य्ड्ढ ढथ्दृदृद्ध दृढ  य्ड्ढ  ख़्दृद्वद्ड्ढ  डन्र् य्ठ्ठद्य्  ड्ढथ्र्डड्ढद्ध.  

*ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड.

*ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड.

*ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड.

*ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड *Eद्रद्वदश्ड्ढड्ड ठ्ठद्म् दृद्धड्डड्ढद्धड्ढड्ड डन्र् य्ड्ढ व़्ठ्ठद्ध *ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड *Eद्रद्वदश्ड्ढड्ड ठ्ठद्म् दृद्धड्डड्ढद्धड्ढड्ड डन्र् य्ड्ढ व़्ठ्ठद्ध *ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड ठ्ठद्म् दृद्धड्डड्ढद्धड्ढड्ड डन्र् य्ड्ढ व़्ठ्ठद्ध *ख्र्दद्द्धदृड्डद्वहड्ढड्ड र्द्य्ण् य्ड्ढ द्धड्ढहदृथ्ड्ढदड्डठ्ठय्त्दृद दृढ य्ड्ढ द्धड्ढम्ड्डड्ढदद्य्.

*ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड.

*ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड.

 

*ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड *ग़्दृद्य् द्धड्ढहदृद्धड्डड्ढड्ड