UP Governor’s decision flawed
Sir, The decision of UP governor in declining to give permission for prosecuting UP Chief Minister Mayawati in the Taj Corridor case is tantamount to questioning the ruling of the apex court that had ruled earlier that prior sanction of the competent authority is not necessary for prosecuting public servants in corruption cases. Obviously the chief minister is covered under the definition of “public servants” and the governor can’t say that there is no evidence against the chief minister.
Surely, there is more that meets the eye as the governor’s decision has to be seen in the context of the forthcoming Presidential elections and has the full blessings of the UPA government. No doubt the decision is flawed and will be challenged in the court. Let’s hope there won’t be another scapegoat like Buta Singh emerging from this episode.
V Padmanabhan
Bangalore

It’s a negative example
Sir, The action of the UP governor in refusing sanction for the Special Court to prosecute Mayawati, despite Supreme Court’s direction, provides a confusing picture to the common man. He may feel that political scams at high places would ultimately be swept under the carpet. This ultimately sets a very negative example for the state’s administration. I am sure the Constitution may have some provision under which such biased decision can be subject to judicial scrutiny.
J N Mahanty
Puri

BJP’s election promise
Sir, The empty promise, seemingly harmless, of the BJP to the Gurjars to have them included in the ST category has now snowballed into large scale violence. The decision either way is going to have a greater backlash, and the blame for this entirely must lay on the BJP for its irresponsible manifesto and the promises made.
Arun Subramanian
Bangalore

Who can question SC?
Sir, The SC’s remarks on the dereliction of duty by the police authorities of the states facing law and order problems is ironical. Certainly the police force is guilty of non-performance of its duties. But then, similar is the case even with respect to the Supreme Court which failed in its duty to take suo-mutu cognisance to uphold the constitutional rights of the affected masses during the anti-Sikh riots and the Gujarat riots. Who can remark on the Supreme Court for its dereliction of duty?
AJIT SINGH JATT
New Delhi

The guiding principle
Sir, It is heartening to note that the Supreme Court has reiterated that the cost of damages to the public and private property should be recovered from the organisation, which was involved in such destruction. Let that be the divine guiding principle in recovering damages from every organisation whether it pertains to the Gujarat violence or the Gurjar violence.
SACHIN KURMI
Ghaziabad, UP

Follow the ‘Madam’
Sir, Everything is left to the “Madam” to decide — selection of PCC chiefs, chief ministers, council of ministers, even the Prime Minister and the Presidential candidate. She is the supreme leader. If somebody question her, that would be disloyalty to the Gandhi family. One’s loyalty to her is more important than one’s loyalty to the party . Congressmen were a herd of sheep during Indira Gandhi’s regime. They continue to be so even now.
A Srikantaiah
Bangalore

TN tactics unethical
Sir, Tamil Nadu chief minister Karunanidhi’s statement that federal set up is in danger because Tamil Nadu’s water needs are not met by Karnataka and Kerala is another arm twisting tactic.
It was Tamil Nadu that asked for the federal setup by adopting corridor and power politics to pursue their selfish demands — justified or unjustified.
Sathyanarayanarao Magadi
Bangalore