WHISTLE BLOWING: DEFINED

The term whistle blowing can be defined as raising a concern about a wrong doing within an organization. The concern must be a genuine concern about a crime, criminal offence, miscarriage of justice, dangers to health and safety and of the environment And the cover up of any of these.

WHISTLE BLOWER: DEFINED

A whistleblower is an employee, former employee, or member of an organization, especially a business or government agency, who reports misconduct to people or entities that have the power and presumed willingness to take corrective action. Generally the misconduct is a violation of law, rule, regulation and/or a direct threat to public interest, such as fraud, health/safety violations, and corruption. Some of the instances of unethical practices/improper activities adopted by certain organisations, which is required to be reported or for which whistle should be blown are: 1. Theft 2. Harassment 3. Unethical practices 4. Fraud 5. Dishonesty 6. Discrimination 7. Lack of Independence of Board/Committees 8. Improper Director Remuneration Packages 9. Lack of Independence of Auditors 10. Violation of Regulations and Code of Conduct 11. Insider Trading 12. Corruption 13. Bribery 14. Lack of Work Place Safety Hazards 15. Financial Statement Misrepresentation 16. Lack of Proper Internal Controls.

TYPES OF WHISTLE BLOWERS

INTERNAL
Most whistleblowers are internal whistleblowers, who report misconduct on a fellow employee or superior within their company. Here the charge is not against the organization or system but against one individual.

EXTERNAL
External whistleblowers, however, report misconduct to outside persons or entities. In these cases, depending on the information's severity and nature, whistleblowers may report the misconduct to lawyers, the media, law enforcement or watchdog agencies, or other local, state, or federal agencies.

SOME STATISTICS FROM STUDY CONDUCTED AROUND THE WORLD.

233 individuals polled 40% responded ,

Negative Impacts of Whistle Blowing

51% of government employees lost their job 82% harassed by superiors 69% watched closely after blowing the whistle 63% lost job responsibilities 60% fired 10% attempted suicide

Positive Effects Of Whistle Blowing:

20% felt their actions resulted in positive changes More than 50% (of responders) would do it again

WHISTLE BLOWING SCENE IN INDIA

There have been multiple instances of threatening, harassment and even murder of various whistleblowers. Two years later from murder of Satyendra Dubey, an Indian Oil Corporation officer, Shanmughan, was murdered for sealing a petrol pump that was selling adulterated fuel. A Karnataka official SP Mahantesh, said to be a whistle-blower in controversial land allotments by societies was murdered in May 2012. The Whistle Blower Resolution the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions empowered the Central Vigilance Commissioner (CVC) to act on the complaints of whistleblowers and to protect them. Through the resolution, the government authorized the CVC to act as the `designated agency' to receive written complaints. India does not have a law to protect whistleblowers; however, Whistle Blowers Protection Bill, 2011 was approved by the Cabinet of India as part of a drive to eliminate corruption in the country's bureaucracy and passed by the Loksabha on 27 December 2011.The Bill is still pending before the Rajyasabha.

WHY WHISTLE BLOWING IS SO HARD IN INDIA??

ETHICAL DILEMMA The Mum Effect --reluctance to blow the whistle Audit report may contradict the best
judgment and vested interests of the powerful players backing a project; fear of reprisals.

The Deaf Effect --reluctance to hear the whistle I wrote lots of reports. I escalated things
as much as I could, but in the end, they said, We really appreciate your efforts, but thanks, but no thanks

The Blind Effect --reluctance to see the need to blow the whistle Established audit
functions do not operate effectively because they try to conceal the information from management.

FEAR & DOUBT

Will I be viewed as a rat who ratted out the company? I will be resented by my colleagues. Stress could lead to resorting to drinking, self-destructive behavior. If I lose this job, what will my family do? What if those guys find out and harm me?

There are a variety of theories as to why whistle blowing hasn't being used as extensively in India as it is internationally. Says Bharat K, chartered accountant, JR Desai & Co, "An organizational culture which encourages honesty, transparency and a sense of moral obligation or responsibility is most likely to give rise to individuals who would not hesitate to

blow the whistle in case they spot any wrongdoing. It is important for the whistleblower to have access to communication channels and reach the people that matter. Hence, a very hierarchical organizational set-up with a single nucleus of power, as we commonly see in India, can prove to be a major roadblock to whistle blowing."An interesting observation made by the ASSOCHAM. Laws relating to whistle blowing and the protection of whistleblowers are also ambiguous and inadequate. Framing a whistleblower policy is not mandatory in India, although clause 49 of The Companies Act states that every company should disclose in its annual report whether a whistleblower policy is in place and who it is applicable to. First, the Companies Act does not contain a provision that makes it mandatory for companies to have whistle blowing policies in India. Indian companies dont show any desire to have a whistle blowing policy in place. They dont know how to handle such casesIn India there have been innumerable instances of whistle blowers being killed. So its hardly a surprise that such few people come forward with instances of wrong doing.

list of attacks made on whistle blowers in India

Name State Date Attack type Nature of Activism

Ketan Shah

Gujarat

14 January 2013

Attacked, removed to hospital."Cops take RTI activist on fast to hospital". For exposing corruption The Times of India. 15 May 2011. Retrieved 18 July 2013.

Rinku Singh Rahi

Uttar Pradesh

Rahi is a bureaucrat who Assaulted, removed 26 March used RTI to expose to a mental 2009 welfare scheme fraud in institution.[7] Muzzaffarnagar

Firoz Ibrahim Khan

Maharashta

11/17/07

Assault[8]

Name

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Gopalbandhu Chhatria

Orrisa

2 January Assault[9] 2009

Ripu Daman Ohri

Punjab

6 January Assault[10] 2009

Munikrishna

Karnataka

10/27/09

Assault[11]

Ajay Kumar

Delhi

1 January Assault[12] 2010

Used RTI to enquire about private house/shop construction on public land under authorization given by a Delhi politician.

Kiran Pandey

Punjab

1 October Assault[13] 2010

Sumaira Abdulali Maharashtra

3/16/10

Assault[14]

Abhay Patil

Maharashtra

4 January Assault[15] 2010

Ashok Kumar Shinde

Maharashtra

7/17/10

Assault[16]

Budhai Kumar

Uttar Pradesh

8 September Assault[17] 2010

S Channabasappa Karnataka Patil

9/16/10

Assault[18]

Name

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Yashwant Gavand

Maharashtra

1 February 2011

Assault[19]

Arun Baburao Mane

Maharashtra

1 February 2011

Assault[20]

Salman Reddy

Orissa

1/17/11

Assault[21]

Safdar Ali

Jammu and Kashmir

1/20/11

Assault[22]

Vikrant Karnik

Maharashtra

1/25/11

Assault[23]

Amar Pandey

Uttar Pradesh

1/27/11

Assault[24]

Gopal Prasad, Anil Mittal, Nanda Sawant

Delhi

2 March 2011

Assault[25]

Mangala Ram

Rajasthan

3 March 2011

Assault[26]

Bharat Guggul, Bhanji Jogen

Gujarat

3 May 2011

Assault[27]

Vishnu Medhkar Maharashtra

4 February 2011

Assault[26]

Dilip Jaiswal

Maharashtra

4 May

Assault[28]

Name

State

Date 2011

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Arvind Kaushal

Maharashtra

4 August 2011

Assault[29]

Popat Barge

Maharashtra

4/17/11

Assault[30]

Jai Bhagwan and Haryana Karambir

5/21/11

Assault[31]

Ismail Patwari

Maharashtra

5/27/11

Assault[32]

C.P. Singh

Maharashtra

6/22/11

Assault[33]

Baghu Dewani

Gujarat

6/24/11

Assault[34]

Ganasham Kunkolkar

Goa

7/22/11

Assault[35]

Jaisukh Bambhania

Daman and Diu

8 August 2011

Assault[36]

Sanjit Das

Meghalaya

8/14/11

Assault[37]

Ajay Ambalia

Gujarat

8/31/11

Assault[38]

Parshuram Kishanlal Mali

Gujarat

9 July 2011

Assault[39]

Manisha Goswami

Gujarat

9/21/11

Assault[40]

Name

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Mehul Kataria

Maharashtra

10 July 2011

Assault[41]

Santosh M Tiwari

Maharashtra, Gujarat

10/16/11

Assault[42]

Poonam Solanki Gujarat

12 February 2011

Assault[43]

Akhilesh Saxena Uttar Pradesh

2008

Assault[9]

Parameswar Sabar

Orissa

June 2011 Assault[44]

Niren Pareek, Assam Christopher Minz

May 2007 Assault[45]

Tapal Ganesh

Karnataka

Unknown Assault[46]

Purshottam Chauhan

Gujarat

Unknown Assault[47]

Narayan Hareka

Orissa

Unknown Assault[48]

Akhil Gogoi

Assam

Unknown Assault[45]

Sumit Kumar Mahato

Jharkhand

Unknown Assault[9]

Bibhav Kumar,

Uttar Pradesh

1/26/07

Harassment[49][dead

Name Rajeev Kumar

State

Date

Attack type
link]

Nature of Activism

Tukaram Bansode

Maharashtra

12/31/07

Harassment[50]

V Gopalakrishnan

Tamil Nadu

3/13/09

Harassment[51]

Srikant Prabhu

Maharashta

5 January Harassment[9] 2009

Kishori Ram

Bihar

7/21/09

Harassment[9]

Goverdhan Singh Rajasthan

3 January Harassment[9] 2010

Mohit Sharma

Delhi

3 December Harassment[52] 2010

Jay Kumar Raghuvanshi

Maharashtra

3/13/10

Harassment[53]

Davinder Khurana

Punjab

4 February 2010

Harassment[9]

Ramesh Agrawal Chattisgarh

6/23/10

Harassment[9]

Ganesh Borhade Maharashtra

7 July 2010

Harassment[54]

Name

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Manish Bhatnagar

Maharashtra

7/18/10

Harassment[55]

Harshad Patil

Maharashta

8/13/10

Harassment[56]

Gopalkrishnan, Siva Elango, Madhav Vishnubhatta

Tamil Nadu

9 January Harassment[57] 2010

Fatima Mynsong, Acquiline Meghalaya Songthiang, Matilda Suting

9 January Harassment[58] 2010

Abhijit Ghosh

Maharashta

9 January Harassment[59] 2010

Ratna Ala

Gujarat

9/29/10

Harassment[60]

Bobby Basaiawmoit

Meghalaya

2 January Harassment[61] 2011

Mary Anne Pohshna

Meghalaya

3 September Harassment[62] 2011

Sanjay Gurav

Maharashtra

3/22/11

Harassment[63]

M Z Ali

Karnataka

5 October Harassment[64] 2011

Name

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Ketan Shah

Gujarat

5 December Harassment[65] 2011

Ravinder Rathi

Haryana

6 February 2011

Harassment[66]

Payi Gyadi

Arunachal Pradesh

6 May 2011

Harassment[67]

Brijesh Kumar

Delhi

8 February 2011

Harassment[68]

Ashok Paswan

Bihar

8/19/11

Harassment[69]

Arvind Sharma

Punjab

9 May 2011

Harassment[70]

Derrick Dias

Goa

9 November Harassment[35] 2011

Subhash Aggarwal

Delhi

10 July 2011

Harassment[71]

Sheeba Fehmi and Arshad Ali Fehmi

Delhi

10 August Harassment[72] 2011

Sanjay Gurav

Maharashtra

11/28/11

Harassment[73]

Name

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Anupam Saraf, Vaibhav Gandhi Maharashtra and Dinesh Shah

12/13/11

Harassment[74]

R. Marijoseph

Karnataka

12/30/11

Harassment[75]

Kishan Lal Gera Haryana

Since 2008

Harassment[76]

R V Prasanna

Karnataka

Since 2009

Harassment[77]

Shiv Prakash Rai Bihar

May 2008 Harassment[69]

Takhellambam Ibempishak, Sagolsem Memcha and Konjengbam Anita Pawan Sharma

Manipur

Since Apr Harassment[78] 2011

Uttar Pradesh

Since 11 April 2011

Harassment[79]

Emmanuel

Andhra Pradesh

February Harassment[80][dead and March link] 2011 Since February 2011 Since April 2011

Jagbir Singh

Delhi

Harassment[81]

Biren Luwang

Manipur

Harassment[82]

Name Injambakkam H Sekar

State

Date Since August 2011

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Tamil Nadu

Harassment[83]

Khirasindhu Sagria

Orrisa

Since November Harassment[84] 2011 2007 2007 2008 2009 2010 Harassment[85] Harassment[9] Harassment[9] Harassment[86] Harassment[87]

Muzibur Rehman Unknown Saleem Baig Asith Sangma Ashok Verma Kheemaram Shivaji Raut Ajay Gakhar All Gujarat RTI users Ankur Patil Uttar Pradesh Meghalaya Punjab Rajasthan Maharashtra Delhi Gujarat

June 2011 Harassment[88] July 2011 Harassment[89] July 2011 Harassment[90] September Harassment[91] 2011 December Harassment[92] 2011 2011 2011 Harassment[93] Harassment[94]

Maharashtra

Gunjan Mehta Durga C J Karira Nelapati Papireddy, Pachalla Suryanarayana Reddy and Kovuru Satyanarayana

Gujarat Delhi Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh

2011

Harassment[95]

Name Reddy

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Mohinder Kumar Punjab Anwar Shaikh Maharashtra

Unknown Harassment[96] Unknown Harassment[97] Unknown Harassment[98] Unknown Harassment[99] Unknown Harassment[100]

Y. Ekyimo Kikon Nagaland Ashok Rathod Gujarat

Bharat H Gajjar, Gujarat Milan Joshi Rolly Shivhare

Madhya Pradesh Unknown Harassment[9] Unknown Harassment[101][dead

link]

Jai Prakash Arya Delhi Gian Singh Ram Sagar Sumankant Raichaudhari Piyusha Tiwari Rayabhai Zapadiya Razuddin Rukhminibhai Roshan Lobo Delhi Delhi Bihar Rajasthan Gujarat Harayana Andhra Pradesh Karnataka

Unknown Harassment[101] Unknown Harassment[102] Unknown Harassment[103] Unknown Harassment[104] Unknown Harassment[105] Unknown Harassment[106] Unknown Harassment[107] Unknown Harassment[108] Unknown Harassment[40]

Bhadresh Wamja Gujarat Bhanjibhai Jogel and Bharatbhai Gujarat Ghughal

Unknown Harassment[40]

Name

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism Mehta used RTI to expose NREGA related scams. Fought for the social audit ofNREGA Sought information on the nexus among officers, politicians, contractors and middlemen in NREGA related irrigation projects in Deori.

Lalit Mehta

Jharkhand

5/15/08

Killed[109]

Kameshwar Yadav

Jharkhand

6 July 2008

Killed[3]

Venkatesh Satish Shetty Arun Sawant

Karnataka Maharashtra Maharashtra

4 June 2009 1/13/10

Killed[110] Killed[111]

2 January Killed[112] 2010 2 November Killed[113] 2010 2/14/10 Killed[114]

Vishram Laxman Gujarat Dodiya Shashidhar Mishra

Bihar

Sola Ranga Rao

Andhra Pradesh

4 November Killed[113] 2010 4/21/10 5/22/10 Killed[115] Killed[116] Used RTI to expose illegal mining in the Gir Forest area. BJP MP Dinu Boga arrested by CBI in this case. Earlier Gujarat police has given

Vitthal Gite Dattatraya Patil

Maharashtra Maharashtra

Amit Jethwa

Gujarat

7/20/10

Killed[117]

Name

State

Date

Attack type

Nature of Activism clean chit to Dinu Boga.

Vijay Pratap (alias Babbu Singh) Ramdas Ghadegaonkar Sonu

Uttar Pradesh

7/25/10

Killed[118]

Maharashtra

8/27/10

Killed[119]

Haryana

2 October Killed[120] 2011 3 February 2011 12/29/11 Exposed corruption by contractors in work under MNREGA.[1]

Niyamat Ansari

Jharkhand

Killed

[1]

Amit Kapasia Shehla Masood S Bhuvaneswaran

Gujarat

Killed[121] Killed[122]

Madhya Pradesh 8/16/11 Tamil Nadu

1 October Killed[123] 2012 11 May 2011 Killed (reason possibly unrelated)[124]

Nadeem Saiyed

Gujarat

Ramvilas Singh

Bihar

Killed (reason 12 August possibly 2011 unrelated)[125] 8/19/10 Killed(?)[126]

V Tamil Nadu Balasubramanian Jabbardan Gadhvi Ms. Poonam Solanki Dudhram Gujarat

2/22/11 12 July 2011

Suicide[127]

Gujarat

Assault[43][128] Assault[129]

Human Rights Activist

Jaipur, Rajasthan 2 February

Name

State

Date 2012

Attack type

Nature of Activism

Premnath Jha

Virar, Mumbai

25 Feb 2012

Killed[130]

Filed several RTI queries with the Vasai Virar Municipal Corporation seeking details of several construction projects

Akhil Gogoi

Nalbari, Assam Raigarh, Chhattisgarh Amravati, Maharashtra

5 July 2012 7 July 2012

Assault[131]

Ramesh Agarwal

Shot[132]

Rajesh suresh Bobade

21 September Assault 2012

12 Vasudeva Adiga Udupi,Karnataka January 2013

Killed[133]

Ram Kumar Thakkur

Ratnauli Village, 23 March Muzzafarpur Killed[2] 2013 District, Bihar

Lawyer; Persisted with a legal case exposing "irregularities" in the implementation of NREGA welfare scheme in his village. Earlier, used RTI and exposed fraud involving sarpanch (village head).[2]

THE ROLE OF CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISION

THE WHISTLE RESOLUTION
The ministry of personnel, public grievances and pensions notified a resolution, empowering the central vigilance commissioner to action the complaints of whistleblowers and to protect them. Through the resolution the government authorizes the CVC to act as the designated agency to receive the written complaints. The CVC has announced that it has the responsibility of keeping the identity of the complainant secret, even though it cannot stop the complainant himself from disclosing his identity or making the complaint public. motivated No clarity on what appropriate steps would be taken against such a complainant.

GLIMPSE AT BILL INTRODUCED IN PARLIAMENT

The Bill faced considerable criticism because of following reasons: 1. Its jurisdiction is restricted to the government sector and encompasses only those who are working for the Government of India or its agencies; it does not cover the stategovernment employees. 2. The proposed law has neither provisions to encourage whistle blowing (financial incentives), nor deals with corporate whistleblowers; it does not extend its jurisdiction to the private sector even after the fraud at Satyam. 3. It outlines sanctions for false complaints. However, it does not provide a penalty for attacking a complainant.

LEGISLATIONS ACROSS COUNTRIES

UK- the United Kingdom is one of the first European states to legislate on the Protection of "whistle-blowers". The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 was enacted to protect workers from suffering a detriment, or being dismissed by their employers for raising concerns about serious misconduct or malpractice that threatens the public interest. The PIDA gives protection against victimization or dismissal to "whistleblowers", covering both private and public sector employees, voluntary sector employees, as well as other workers including agency staff, home workers, trainees, contractors and all professionals in the National Health Service (NHS), who raise concerns about serious fraud or malpractice at their work place, provided they have acted in a responsible way in dealing with the concerns, that they make the disclosure in good faith, that they reasonably believe the information to be substantially true and provided they do not act for personal gain. US-U.S has a lot of provisions for federal employees. There are different Acts enacted at different levels which tries to protect the employees from illegal actions of the companies and rewarding whistleblowers at the same time. Some of these acts are- The False Claim Act, IRS Whistleblower Informant Award, The Occupational Safety and Health Act, State Whistleblower Law, Sarbanes Oxley Act, Whistle Blower Protection Act. The Corporate and Criminal Fraud Accountability Act of 2002, better known as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act,

provides protection to the Employees of Publicly Traded Companies.(section 806)x The Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 is a United States federal law that protects federal whistleblowers, or persons who work for the government who report agency misconduct.

CASE STUDY: GOLDEN QUARDILATERAL CORRIDOR PROJECT (NHAI)

WHISTLE BLOWER SATYENDRA DUBEY
EDUCATION - B.Tech , M.Tech (Civil) OCCUPATION - Astt. Director EMPLOYER - Govt. of India In July 2002, he was employed by the National Highway Authority of India (NHAI). Dubey became the Assistant Project Manager & managed a part of the AurangabadBarachatti section of National Highway 2 (The Grand Trunk Road). This highway was part of the Golden Quadrilateral (GQ) Corridor Project. This was India's most ambitious road project - a network of 14,000 kilometers that would connect the four metro cities of Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata with multi-lane highways was initiated by the Prime Minister of India, Atal Bihari Vajpayee. While working at the NHAI, Dubey discovered that the contracted firm assigned to build sections of the roads, LARSEN & TOUBRO had been subcontracting the actual work to smaller groups, controlled by the local mafia. He found that these smaller contractors did not have the expertise to build quality roads. Later on, Dubey reportedly had the contractor rebuild six kilometers of roads at a loss to the mafia. He wrote a letter to his boss, NHAI Project Director SK Soni, and to Brig Satish Kapoor, regarding the irregularities in project, there was no action. In August 2003, against his own will, he was transferred to Gaya. At Gaya, he experienced the same corruption found in Koderma. Frustrated with the lack of action, Dubey wrote directly to the Prime Minister. November 2002, Satyendra Dubey sent a letter to the PMO detailing the financial and contractual irregularities in the project & large-scale systemic corruption in the National Highway Authority of India & poor quality control. He exposed a conspiracy between contractors building the roads and the officials appointed to check them & about contactors

submitting forged documents to justify their technical and financial capabilities to execute the project. He named four contractors and gave details of their misdeeds. He also made a special request that his name be kept secret when the PMO investigated the matter. While the letter was not signed, he attached a separate bio-data so that the matter would be taken more seriously. The PMO even then didnt bother to investigate. Satyendra's letter gave the names Centrosity of Russia, China Coal of China, LG of S.Korea and Pioneer Constructions Ltd. as being guilty of taking the contracts by manipulation and bribing and subsequently giving it away to subcontractors and making huge profits without doing any value adding work. Despite a direct request that his identity be kept secret and the letter's sensitive content, accusing some of Dubey's superiors, the letter along with bio-data was forwarded immediately to the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. Satyendra name was not protected and the file containing his complaint was circulated to various offices. On 27, November 2003, Satyendra Dubey was returning from a wedding. He reached Gaya railway station at three in the morning and found that his car was not able to start. Dubey never made it home. He was found by his personal driver, shot dead in Gaya. In mid-January, 2004 key witness, Pradeep Kumar, "disappeared" Two other witnesses, who were interrogated by the CBI in this case, allegedly committed suicide within a day in the end of January. There was no investigation of these happenings or CBI's role in these suspicious deaths. Three persons were sentenced to life imprisonment by a special CBI court for murdering NHAI engineer Satyendra Dubey namely Mantu Kumar, Udai Kumar, Pinku Ravidas under sections 302 of IPC for murder , Section 394 of IPC for voluntary causing hurt in committing robbery and the Arms Act for possessing unlicensed weapon. As a whistleblower Dubey had his own moral guidelines on what he thought was right and wrong. While many people would have chosen to look the other way, Dubey believed that it was his responsibility to bring corruption to the attention of his superiors, for the good of India. In his letter to the Prime Minister, Dubey's request to keep his identity hidden was not an act of avoiding responsibility, but rather to secure his own personal safety. The Prime Minister of India and the Indian government not only failed to assist Dubey in correcting these contracting violations, but their actions may have led to Dubey's murder. SATYENDRA K. DUBEY LETTER TO PM OF NOVEMBER11, 2002 To The Prime Minister

Republic of India Prime Ministers Office New Delhi - 110 001 Sub: National Highways Development Project (Golden Quadrilateral and North-South, EastWest Corridors) A dream project of unparalleled importance to the Nation but in reality a great loot of public money because of very poor implementation at every state. Honorable Sir, Through this letter, I wish to draw your kind attention towards great lapse in the implementation of above project. Since such letters from a common man are not usually treated with due seriousness, I wish to clarify at the outset that this letter is being written after careful thought by a very concerned citizen of the country who is also very closely linked with the project. I request you to kindly go through my brief particulars (attached on a separate sheet to ensure secrecy) before proceeding further. Instead of writing at length, I would be very specific and to the point highlighting the areas where there have been great lapses and would suggest certain remedies to the best of my abilities. I have been posted both at NHAI, HQ and at site on NH-2 Projects and therefore my direct experience is with NH-2 Projects (World Bank Funded). However, the story is almost same with all other projects which are under implementation and would be no different for forthcoming Projects unless we take certain corrective measures immediately. I have gone through most of the files (even closed ones) dealing with NH-2 projects (their design consultancy, procurement of civil contractors, selection of supervision consultants, the mobilisation of contractors and consultants, etc.). The areas of concern are highlighted below: Preparation of detail project reports (DPRs) by the Design Consultants The DPRs prepared by the design consultants are in very poor shape and cannot be implemented in the field without major modifications. It appears that the design consultants have made the designs and drawings with little consideration for the actual ground conditions and the same have been accepted by NHAI without any scrutiny. The proof consultants (deployed for checking DPRs submitted by Design Consultants) appear to have done only cosmetic work and it appears that the officers in NHAI have not even opened the final DPRs submitted by the consultants before putting the works to tender. The result is that the DPRs, on the basis of which tenders have been called, are like garbage. When the problems are being noticed in DPR at the implementation stage and the design consultants are being requested to clarify them, we are getting a very cool and negative response from them. This is contributing to delay in the implementation of projects. A good DPR is one of the foremost requirements for the smooth implementation of the Project and we are faltering at the very initial stage. In the present system there appears to be no accountability on the part of Design Consultant. To ensure this, we should evolve a system whereby the design consultant can be made accountable for any problem in the implementation of DPR and their consequent implications in terms of time and cost overruns.

A system of insurance may be devised to address this issue. The Design Consultant may be asked to keep his establishment at site in the initial stage of implementation of project, so that any design issue may be addressed speedily. Alternatively, we may link substantial portion of payment of Design consultants to the implementation of DPR in the field. Another way may be to award design consultancy (for preparation of DPR) and supervision consultancy (to supervise the execution of project) to the same consultancy firm so that any discrepancy noticed in DPR at the execution stage is corrected by the same firm. We may deliberate further to arrive at the most suitable option. Procurement of civil contractors The process of procurement appears to have been completely manipulated and hijacked by the big contractors. Many contractors are submitting forged documents to justify their technical and financial capabilities to execute the project. The big contractors have been able to get all sorts of help (including even the most secret information and documents) from the officials in NHAI and even the note sheets carrying approval of chairman have been leaked outside. (This mostly appears to have been done by lower officials and supporting staff). Little thought has been given to the ability & sincerity of some of the contractors to do the work they have quoted for. The three striking examples are awards of NH-2 to M/s Centrodorstoy of Russia , M/s China Coal of China and M/s LG of South Korea which are all working like commission agents by collaborating with local incompetent and inexperienced firms and trying to get the work done through them. M/s Progressive Constructions Ltd is another contractor which appears to have completely manipulated the system to get the award of 2 projects on NH-2. This company is not organized on professional lines and it is run like a family business. They get one work and assign it to one relative, the second is assigned to another and the story goes on. There is an urgent need to have a fresh look at the whole procurement process and utmost care needs to be exercised at the time of selection of contractors. The whole process should be made more transparent and any official found colluding with the contractors should be severely punished. Mobilization of Contractors and Mobilization Advance to them NHAI officials have shown great hurry in giving mobilisation advance to the selected contractors (no surprise, as the commission to officials for award of work is linked to the contractors getting their first mobilization advance). In some cases the contractors have been given mobilization advance just a day after signing the Contract Agreement. The entire mobilization advance of 10 per cent of contract value (which goes up to Rs 40 crores in certain cases) has been paid to the contractors within a few weeks of award of work but there has been little follow-up to ensure that they are actually mobilised at site with the same pace. The result is that the entire mobilisation advance remains lying with contractors (or gets diverted in their other activities) for months a way for contractors to make easy money and for client to loose interest charges on them. Most of the contractors have not mobilized even up to 50 per cent, a year after getting their mobilization advances. Similar diversion or idling of funds are taking place in case of equipment advances to the contractors, another 10 per cent of the contract value. In many cases, the equipment is not being purchased and, even if purchased, is being used somewhere else. The contractors are getting customs and excise duty exemptions on most of the road construction equipment.

However, because of laxity on the part of NHAI, the contractors in many cases are buying equipment on behalf of or for other parties and appropriating a portion of the excise/custom duty exemptions in their pocket. We need to be vigilant and careful in giving advances to the contractors. The advances are given to the contractors to mobilise them quickly in the interest of project and therefore the same should be linked to their actual mobilisation at site. The advances should be given in installments and the release of next installment should be made dependent on utilisation of the previous installment. A strict vigil and audit needs to be done to ensure that the advances are used by contractors for quick mobilisation and are utilised in the same project for which they are being given. Selection of Supervision consultants and Design consultants The concept of supervision consultancy is a step in very right direction and the amount spent on them (roughly 2-3% of the cost of civil works) is a good investment. But here again we are faltering at the implementation stage. There is a big fraud in the selection of Supervision/Design consultants which mainly depends on their technical manpower. To get the consultancy work, the consultants are proposing to deploy well-qualified and senior professionals in their technical proposals (many times their qualification and experience are being forged and NHAI officials are not taking any pain to ask for the documentary proof in support of their claims). Many a times, the same professional figures simultaneously in technical proposals forwarded by many consultants and NHAI officials are doing little to discourage it. However, once that work is awarded to them, they are invariably coming with the request for replacement of their proposed personnel with professionals of much less qualification & experience. To our shame, we in NHAI are giving least resistance to this trend and the proposals for replacement of professionals are being approved freely. The curriculum vitae of professionals are invariably being fabricated and manipulated by consultants to get approval, as the NHAI officials are not asking for any documentary proof in support of the qualification & experience claimed. Instead they are abetting this crime. The consultants in first instance come with the replacement CV to have an informal discussion with the officials. However, once they are given the feeling that the same can t be approved on file, the CV of same man is properly fabricated (in connivance with NHAI officials) and submitted formally and the approval is granted. This is the state of affairs. The end result is that the consultants propose to deploy the most qualified, experienced and senior men in their organisation (or outside their organisation) to get the work and, once awarded the work, replace them by much inferior persons. They propose the same senior team to get another work and repeat the same story of replacement and the drama goes on. This way, the consultants are completely manipulating the system. The well-qualified persons in head offices of consultancy firms are thus being used simply to get the work, but they are not being sent to the site, where they are being proposed to be deployed. The field units of these consultancy firms are instead being asked by their Head offices to look for the required personnel. The result is that many key professional posts are lying vacant for months or are being filled by unqualified person. In all these, it is the project which ultimately suffers.

This whole drama can be very easily checked provided we have the will. It is all the more easy in the totally computerized system at NHAI. A few steps outlined below will go a long way in remedying this ill. (i) No consultant should be allowed to propose the deployment of same professional in more than one technical proposal. (ii) It should be ensured that the same person is not proposed to be deployed by more than one consultancy firm. (iii) It should be ensured that the person proposed by a consultancy firm is actually working in the firm or is having a bond with the firm to work in the project if the firm is awarded the project. (iv) Replacement should be approved only under very extraordinary circumstances and a penalty should be imposed on the firm for their inability to deploy the proposed professional. (v) All documentary proof in support of the qualification & experience claimed by a person should be asked. In summary, it should be ensured that the supervision consultants deploy a well qualified & experienced team for proper supervision of the work. This becomes all the more important, because the supervision consultant (known as Engineer in FIDIC contract document) has been given immense powers & responsibilities under FIDIC conditions of contract which we are following. The problem of subletting or subcontracting The NHAI is going for International Competitive Bidding to procure the most competent Civil Contractor for execution of its projects. The works are usually being awarded at high cost and the contractors are assuring the best quality in the execution of projects . However, when it comes to the actual execution of works, it is found that most of the works (sometimes even up to 100 per cent) are being sublet or subcontracted to small petty contractors who are not at all capable to execute such big projects and ensure the quality of construction assured by the Civil Contractors. As a result, the entire process of short listing & pre-qualification of contractors and International Competitive Bidding are being nullified and what we are getting are the numerous petty contractors working at site and making a mockery of the prestigious project. The main Civil Contractors who have been awarded the work by NHAI are doing all these under the veil of labor contract which is permissible under the Contract Agreement. But in reality, they are getting most of the work done through numerous small petty contractors (main contractors are supplying only a few critical equipment & materials) at 50-60 per cent of the price quoted by them and the rest 40 per cent of contract price is being pocketed by them without much effort. In the process, the main contractors are working just like commission agents. I would like to mention here that the above phenomena of subletting and subcontracting is known to all from top to bottom but everyone is maintaining a studied silence. It wouldnot be inappropriate to say that all these mouths have been shut by these big

contractors who are manipulating the system and individuals alike. These petty contractors are bringing poor equipment & material, giving a big setback to the progress & quality of work. The main contractors are least bothered about the timely completion of projects (and penalties, if they are unable to finish the work in time) as they are quite sure of getting time extension by manipulating the individuals. They have already started fabricating spurious claims to make grounds for time extension and cost overruns. If this issue of subcontracting is not taken up with urgency, the entire project will be a very big failure both in terms of quality of construction and timely completion. This issue cannot be expected to be tackled by field units of NHAI as the decision to sublet the works are being taken by Head offices of the contractors & not their field units. To address this, the top administration in NHAI has to take up the matter aggressively with the top management of contractors. NHAI organisation & office system It would not be inappropriate to say that there is no system in NHAI, there are only individuals. There is an urgent need to review and restructure the office procedure and office set up including the file system. Record keeping is very poor and it would be difficult to trace even the most important papers after some time. The entire organization is almost based on sourcing people on deputation basis. There is a need to have some permanent cadre strength in NHAI. In its zeal to maintain a lean and thin organization, one Accounts officer/Manager (Finance) is allotted to two Project Implementation Units spaced around 200-300 kms apart, which is a mere nonsense. There is an immediate need to deploy one Accounts Officer/Manager (Finance) in each PIU, which have to manage projects of around Rs.1,000 crores. The earlier we take up these issues, the better it is for the health of NHAI. If some wellplanned measures are not taken soon, the NHAI as a system is headed for big failure. As a concerned citizen of the country, I have brought these issues to your notice for your kind intervention and necessary action. Looking at the enormity of public fund involved in the project, the matter needs your urgent attention. I have written all these in my individual capacity. However, I will keep on addressing these issues in my official capacity in the limited domain within the powers delegated to me. If any elaboration/clarification is needed on above issues I would be glad to render all my assistance in the interest of this very prestigious National Highways Development Project, which is undoubtedly the biggest ever project undertaken in India after independence. Thanking you, Your sincerely, (For particulars please refer to the separate sheet) (See Box) Name: S.K. Dubey Educational Qualification: B.Tech (Civil Engineering) from IIT, Kanpur Profession: Presently working as Manager (Tech.) in NHAI and posted at Project Implementation Unit, Koderma. Parent Cadre: Ministry of Road Transport and Highways

Other details: After graduating from IIT Kanpur in Year 1994, I was selected in Engineering Services Examination, 1994 conducted by UPSC and joined the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MORTH) in March 1996. I was also selected in Civil Services Examinations 1997 (Rank-258) and 1999 (Rank 198) but decided to continue with the MORTH. Presently, I am on deputation to National Highways Authority of India. Address: S.K. Dubey, Manager National Highways Authority of India Project Implementation Unit, Koderma Gurdwara Road, Jhumri Telaiya, Koderma (Jharkhand) Phone: 06534-23436 (O), 22576 (O), 22619 (R) E-mail: satyendra_dubeyin@...

IMPACT
The Supreme Court issued notices to CBI seeking independent probe into the allegation of corruption in Rs 30,000 crore Golden Quadrilateral corridor Project. The procurement of civil contracts, mobilizing of contracts and advances for projects, subcontracting of projects and the "systemic failure" of the National Highway Authority of India

(NHAI) in awarding contracts are some of the areas where discrepancies were found. CBI officials say they have been able to confirm "four of the six areas" of corruption that Dubey highlighted. Scrutiny of documents and site inspections revealed that, in some cases, norms had been violated while paying out huge mobilization advances in just two days instead of the stipulated 30 days. It was also found that private contractors had illegally sub-contracted work to a second, third, even fourth party. In some stretches, sub-standard material and poor equipment had been used. On a number of occasions inflated bills had been submitted to the NHAI. The NHAI eventually admitted that Dubey's charges were substantiated, and implemented "radical reforms" in selection and contract procedures. In August 2013, a bench of Justices K S Radhakrishnan and Arjan Kumar Sikri ruled that identity of whistleblower can never be revealed to the accused facing prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988

CONCLUSION
Today with Scandals like Satyam, Tyco, AIG, Enron, Worldcom, Zerox, need for more ethical governance has arisen. Whistle blowing has already been described as one of the basic tenets of Corporate Governance, but in India, there is no definite Whistle Blower law. If this tool of Corporate Governance is used in true letter and spirit, it can be savior for protecting the stakeholders and the larger public interest. It can be success factor for survival of

corporates, build their brand image, which will support in raising funds. It can be effective tool in curbing and reporting corporate frauds, which earlier used to go unreported. SILENCE IS DEFINITELY NOT A SOLUTION TO ANY TYPE OF MISCONDUCT / CORRUPTION. As beautifully said by Napoleon; world suffers not because of the violence of bad people but because of silence of good people.

References Websites: https://www.gov.uk/whistleblowing

http://wbhelpline.org.uk/about-us/what-is-whistleblowing/ http://forbesindia.com/blog/business-strategy/why-whistle-blowingis-so-hard-in-india/ http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-0909/work/41903181_1_india-inc-whistleblowing-organisation http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12696470 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satyendra_Dubey http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Professionalism/Satyendra_Dubey_and_ the_National_Highways_Authority_of_India http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/three-get-life-in-satyendradubey-murder-case/article315939.ece http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/keyword/satyendradubey http://realityviews.blogspot.in/2012/08/short-biography-of-satyendradubey-read.html http://prafulkr.wordpress.com/spiritual/satyendra-dubey/