Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

14.02 hrs. Title: Discussion on the motion for adjourment regarding mismanagement in UTI’s US-64 Scheme. (Discussion concluded and motion negatived).

SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI (RAIGANJ): I beg to move:

"That the House do now adjourn."

Mr. Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the small investors of the country and on behalf of our party, I initiate this Adjournment Motion. I shall explain the reasons for bringing this Adjournment Motion a little later.

Only yesterday the Prime Minister, the Leader of the House, and poet Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee made a very interesting statement. Sometimes poets come out with revelations of the truth in their own way. He said and I quote, "बरसात का मौसम है, बादल तो घिरेंगे, लेकिन बादल छटेंगे भी। यह भी पक्का है।" I understand that the Prime Minister was very much concerned over the clouds over his Government relating to telecom scam, the clouds over his Government relating to customs scam, the clouds over his Government relating to the ongoing process of disinvestment, and finally, the clouds over his Government relating to the tussle between the PMO and the Ministry of Finance as to who will bear the responsibility for this scam unheard of in the century - we can call it the scam of the millennium – the US 64 scam.

If this defiance involving the interest of small investors to the tune of Rs. 2 crore is being encouraged and supported by no less than the Finance Minister, does it give him any credit to captain the ship and remain as the Finance Minister? I am not quoting anybody from the Congress Bench; I am quoting from his Joint Secretary’s interview.

It means, he did try to ascertain the facts. It means that he was in the knowledge of it.

But you have not been complied with the requirements and the answers that you are desired to take. It is on 31st July. Now, who is in the Unit Trust? Let me spell it out.

 The hon. Minister further states:

"I do not accept the proposition that public sector institutions should not go through the private placement. "

 श्री प्रियरंजन दासमुंशी अगर अभी यहां उपस्थित होते तो मुझे थोड़ा अधिक आनन्द आता। यह चर्चा किसने उपस्थित की थी? मैं आगे बहुत पढ़ सकता हूं। जिन माननीय सदस्य ने चर्चा उपस्थित की थी, उन्होंने आरोप लगाया 16.00 hrs. The private placement is a new method invented by the institutions and the Government. He also further stated that it is not only the LIC but the UTI has also made an investment of Rs.750 crore. The total investment is Rs.900 crore and the total loss is amounting to Rs.250 crore. यह कब की चर्चा है? उस समय माननीय वित्त मंत्री यशवन्त सिन्हा जी नहीं थे, माननीय मनमोहन सिंह जी थे और यह चर्चा माननीय सदस्य जयपाल रेड्डी जी ने उपस्थित की थी। मैं इस सवाल को आगे भी बहुत पढ़ सकता हूं। अब मेरे सहकारी, मेरे सीनियर कलीग अरुण जेटली जी ने जो बातें उठाईं, उसमें उन्होंने मुम्बई की कम्पनी का नाम नहीं लिया, मैं उसका स्पष्ट तौर पर नाम लेना चाहता हूं, This is a fraud committed by the corporate houses. It is the nexus of the corporate houses and operators with the milibhagat fund managers of financial institutions. This is not a new case. This is going on for years together whether you were ruling or we are ruling. मैं आपके द्वारा सिर्फ इतनी प्रार्थना करना चाहता हूं कि विषय अर्थनीति का है, लेकिन आर्थिक विषय को हम राजकीय बनाकर जाने-अनजाने में जिन अनस्क्रुपलस प्रमोटर्स ने छोटे इन्वैस्टर्स को लूटा है, हम उनकी मदद कर रहे हैं। हम उन्हें एक नई दिशा दे रहे हैं ताकि जो उन्होंने स्कैम किया है, वह पीछे दब जाये। मैं उसी कम्पनी का उदाहरण देता हूं,You know what was the amount of private placement that the Reliance Industries made. वह रिलायंस इंडस्ट्रीज का प्राइवेट प्लेसमेंट है. In a further reply in 1996, he had said it. It was different Government at that time. The Minister might have changed but the institutions and other things remain like that only. उन्होंने लिखा है : The Minister replied and I quote:

The UTI is not an ordinary institution. It has a dealing of Rs.75,000 crore, all that money being the savings of the salaried middle class people. How was this institution run? If I quote Shri Kirit Somaiya, the UTI has invested in 1,426 companies, out of which only 81 showed appreciation. Almost about 654 of them are not even traceable; they do not even have an address of their own and many of them are unlisted companies. Does the hon. Minister of Finance not know about it? What is the Ministry of Finance doing about it?