Momentum of martyr SKD not converted to MOVEMENT for WHISTLEBLOWERS by SKDF

Commercial Interest Of Kalyan Panda was evident from the very beginning in SKDF. Ashutosh Aman Mishra and Atal Bansal forgot the MESSAGE of martyr SKD

Commercial Interest Of Kalyan Panda was evident from the very beginning.

He was interested in Film making than posting the Satyendra Dubey letter in easy to down load and printable format. And circulate it free all over the world.

Ravinder Singh

Forwarded Message [ Download File | Save to Yahoo! Briefcase ]

Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 23:35:05 -0800 (PST)
From: "R Singh" <corruptionfree04@yahoo.com>
Subject: WORKS OF S.K.DUBEY
To: skdubeyFoundation@yahoogroups.com

HTML Attachment [ Scan and Save to Computer | Save to Yahoo! Briefcase ]

Dear Friends,

It is much more important to the world know the issues of corruption raised by Sh Dubey.

The letter which exposed the corruption be mailed to all, be available as Word or PDF document, – colleges, associations involved in anti-corruption activities which explains everything. Some news channels have covered the story reasonably well, it for us to go after the corrupt and corruption and others to stand up.

His letter shall inspire all young engineers.

best wishes

Ravinder

kalyan panda <kalyan_panda@yahoo.co.in> wrote:


Mr.Nair

for transmission I require either VHS Cassette or VCD 

DVD will also do

regards

panda

Vijit Nair <vijitnair@softhome.net> wrote:

Dear Mr. Panda

I am in the process of preparing a short documentary on the life and work of Shri Dubeyji. I shall try to get it by 2-3 jan and probably u will be able to broadcast it to ur viewers. It may be about 2-3 mins in Macromedia Flash. Is there anything specific that i have to keep in mind for i do not know bout what u guys need such transmission.

I will give u a call soon and we acn decide details if any..

Regards
Vijit
----- Original Message -----
From: kalyan panda
To: vijitnair@softhome.net
Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 1:54 PM
Subject: contact

Dear Sir Mr. Anand has given yr id to contact
I am a cable tv consultant in Mumbai
regards
panda

KALYAN PANDA 33932602
Yahoo! India Mobile: Ringtones, Wallpapers, Picture Messages and more. Download now.

KALYAN PANDA 33932602

 

Advertisements

June 16, 2006 Posted by | Ashutosh Aman Mishra, Atal Bansal, Kalyan Panda [Implanter] Writes, skdf letdown | Leave a comment

NO account for RUPEES collected in the name of martyr SKD by Kalyan Moderator of SKDF, Ashutosh Aman Mishra and Atal Bansal.

No RUPEE Bank Account in INDIA.

THESE THREE collections are acocunted for so far. This is on website of SKDF.

 S. K. Dubey Memorial Fund at IIT Kanpur (As of 16th February 2004)
Total: 3.6 lakhs Rs.
For Family: 2.0 lakhs Rs.
For other: 1.6 lakhs Rs.

Collection by Mr. Shailesh Gandhi (IIT-B Alumni Association) (As of 13th February 2004)
For Family: 5.15 lakhs Rs.

Donation by Others (As of 13th February 2004, informed by Mr. Gandhi)
For Family: 10.0 lakhs Rs.

APART from the above THREE mentioned, SKDF had collected RUPEES from DONORS. We do not have ACCOUNT for this. Ashutosh Aman Mishra, Atal Bansal and Moderator of SKDF yahoogroup Kalyan Panda knows all about this. These THREE are COVERING each other. Kalyan Panda covers for both Ashutosh Aman Mishra and Atal Bansal.

These THREE might have got paid from different sources in RUPEES in INDIA. Which we all do not know.

Atal Bansal must have got support fron Govt. at that time for his BUSINESS. We do not know.

Atal Bansal and Ashutosh Aman Mishra has not given SPECIFIC REASONS for WHY SKDF USA delayed in TRANSFERRING FUNDS to FAMILY of martyr SKD. 

SKDF USA was pressed hard during that time in 2004 by then SKDF members like Rajesh, Sanjay and others about the FUNDS. Atal Bansal gave several reasons. Which we all can't TRSUT Atal Bansal in USA.  This gives SUSPICIOUS nature of HANDLING of FUNDS collected by SKDF USA.

I(VMK) thinks FUNDS Collected in the name of martyr SKD were not in BANK ACCOUNT of SKDF USA. It might have been TRANSFERRED out of the ACCOUNT of SKDF USA. When former SKDF members pressed Atal Bansal and Ashutosh Aman Mishra in 2004, FUNDS slowly started coming back into SKDF USA account. I think, then the funds were TRANSFERRED to family of martyr SKD.

DKD need to write to all of us about exactly when family got the money. Dates and Amounts from SKDF USA. We need to know this from DKD.

That is why SKDF USA does not want to release any CHECKS Written from the begining, Bank Statements from the begining and list of the DONORS and how much they have paid. No one in INDIA or USA knows about this. Only people know is Atal Bansal and Ashutosh Aman Mishra. These two IITians are not releasing any information about BANK ACCOUNTS of SKDF USA. These two are giving room for RUMOURS in SKDF USA by using the name of martyr SKD.

June 9, 2006 Posted by | Ashutosh Aman Mishra, Atal Bansal, Kalyan Panda [Implanter] Writes, SKDF Financial Accounts | Leave a comment

SKDF failed to use the good will and support of Indian Express in seeking justice for Dubey. Ashutosh Aman Mishra has Failed in this as Director of SKDF

Ashutosh Aman Mishra, Atal Bansal and Moderator Kalyan Panda have FAILED in their duties in SKDF.

THREE of them in SKDF drove away members from SKDF, when members raised questions about ACCOUNTABILITY.

Moderator Kalyan Panda instead of following the MESSAGE of martyr SKD, He used SKDF to MALIGN current WHISTLEBLOWERS.

Moderator Kalyan Panda has IMPLANTED emails in SKDF Yahoogroup to settle personal scores.

These THREE did not even understand the MESSAGE of martyr SKD and helped in DERAILING the CBI Investigation.

PIL filed by SKDF was BUNGLED by asking concentrating only in BIHAR STATE. martyr SKD had written a CHARGESHEET to PMO.

June 8, 2006 Posted by | Ashutosh Aman Mishra, Atal Bansal, EXPRESS service, Kalyan Panda [Implanter] Writes, martyr SKD, skdf letdown | Leave a comment

Sequel to the Satyendra Dubey saga:[Question from all of us is that why Atal Bansal and Ashutosh Aman Mishra in SKDF did not carry out the MESSAGE of martyr SKD? ]

Sequel to the Satyendra Dubey saga:

Needed: Commitment to Satya

In November 2003, when Satyendra Dubey was murdered, he was lauded as a symbol of courage. Fellow IIT Alumni around the world lionized Satyendra as a martyr who lost his life for fighting against corruption. All across India, public meetings were held to protest against the murder and to honor Satyendra. The All India Management Association posthumously gave him the Service Excellence Award. UK’s Index on Censorship magazine awarded him the “Index Whistleblower Award”. He was given Transparency International’s “Annual Integrity Award”. Media coverage of the Satyendra story made it sound like the beginning of a revolution for honesty and integrity in public life.

The excitement and passion for honesty in public life faded and the desecration of Satyendra’s martyrdom was accepted by June, 2004.This raises the question: were the earlier actions honoring Satyendra’s acts inspired by a social commitment or a mere fleeting fancy?

Let us first briefly review the sequence of events.

* In November 2002, Satyendra Dubey sent a letter to the PMO
detailing systemic corruption in the National Highway Authority of India. He named four contractors and gave details of their misdeeds. In order to protect himself, he also made a special request that his name be kept secret when the PMO investigated the matter.

* Satyendra’s name was not protected and the file containing his complaint was circulated to various offices. This was like issuing a public contract for his life.

* A year later, on 27, November 2003, Satyendra was murdered in Gaya, the town where he lived and worked for NHAI.

* News reports about Satyendra’s murder stirred the Nation and unleashed a storm of outrage.

* Within days the Prime Minister’s Office and NHAI issued statements defending themselves and trivializing Satyendra’s death.

* On December 14th, 2003, the case was handed over to the CBI.

* By 26th December, the CBI said that according to the evidence given by rickshaw puller Pradeep Kumar, Satyendra had been killed when resisting thieves who were trying to rob him. Most people refused to believe this and the CBI’s explanation further intensified the public outrage.

* 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 murky happenings or the CBI’s role in these suspicious deaths. After keeping quiet for about six months, the CBI again repeated the earlier story in June 2004.

* There has been no public investigation of the alleged corruption within the NHAI and thus no attempt to set things right.

In light of this sequence of events the posthumous honors heaped on Satyendra seem like a mockery. How can we on the one hand honor Satyendra and on the other hand allow the CBI to get away with the claim that he is the random victim of a common thief who killed him to get hold of Rs.4500?

If the CBI story is true then all of us who saw Satyendra as a martyr to honesty, have to admit that he was an ordinary person and the awards, public adulation and hero worship were all a big mistake. It means then that the Satyendra saga is a collective fiction -a falsehood created to fulfill our desperate need of a hero for honesty. Most people do not accept the CBI’s claims and view its handling of this case as a cover-up. Enough people know that the CBI’s investigation is now itself a matter that needs to be investigated. Yet there is no public clamor demanding accountability from either the CBI—or the Prime
Minister’s Office, where the buck really stops.

However, it is still not too late to act. If all the institutions, which honored Satyendra as a martyr, again raise their voice, the truth could still be brought to light. The institutions should do this not merely for the sake of honoring whistle blowers but for salvaging their own credibility. Otherwise the next time the All India Management Association or the IIT Alumni Association talk about the importance of good governance, they will seem shallow and lack credibility.

Even worse, our failure to take effective action will be a signal of both our apathy and our collective fear in dealing with the Government. The primary reason for the affluence of the
developed nations is a public culture of insistence on accountability and honesty in both public and private life. What is really at stake here is this process of evolving such a culture. Satyendra Dubey is important to this struggle, not as an individual, but as a symbol of courage and honesty.

The question most people ask is: “But what can we do?” The simple answer is to find multiple ways of raising a clamour about the following demands:

One: The PMO must reveal the names of the officers who passed on Satyendra’s letter without protecting his identity and take action against them. Similarly action must be taken against the officers in the Ministry of Roads and Transport who circulated the file with Satyendra’s letter to all and sundry.

Two: There must be an open public investigation into the charges of corruption detailed in Satyendra’s letter.

Three: The CBI must explain how and why one witness to Dubey’s murder is missing and two other people died within 24 hours of being interrogated by the CBI.

Our collective failure to get action on these points will not just mean that other honest people will be ever more reluctant to blow the whistle on corruption. More significantly it will mean that our aspiration of making India a world-class economy is a shallow pipe dream. We must create conditions where honesty is honoured, not desecrated.

shailesh Gandhi

A petition on line was started and sent to the Prime Minister of India.

The answer was a deafening silence.

14-Sep-04

To,

The Prime Minister of India,

7, Race Course Road,

New Delhi –1.

Sub.: The martyrdom of Satyendra Dubey.

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

I send this letter to you with a lot of hope. First,- a hope that you will actually read this letter. A hope that you will recognize the importance of the issues being raised in this letter,- of bringing honesty to the agenda of the Nation. Specific issues on the Satyendra Dubey martyrdom have been highlighted in the accompanying letters sent by various Citizens. There is also an e-petition at http://www.satyamevajayate.info with about 900 signatories.

Please consider Mr. Prime Minister, why have we been shorn of any heroes of National acceptance in the post-independence era? There have been many others like this Indra of Satya who have made valiant attempts to bring honesty to the agenda of the Country. Most attempts are crushed. A Nation needs to honour the honest. Satyendra Dubey approached the PMO with a complaint without any personal motive about large-scale generic corruption in the NHAI. Though he requested that his name be kept secret, it was flaunted about for everyone to see. He was killed in a clear attempt to silence his crusade for honesty, whereas the CBI has after over six months claimed to have solved the case by claiming Satyendra died while resisting ‘thieves’. Various citizens have raised relevant issues about this with CBI, NHAI and others, to no avail. If our heroes before independence had to face such a dishonest structure, perhaps all of them would have been shown as having been murdered by thugs and dacoits.

A number of arguments highlighting the obvious flaws in the investigations so far are given in the accompanying letters. Please sir, do spend a little time on this matter, since it concerns the truth. If you can spare ten minutes, I would be very happy to come and meet you to appraise you about the facts of this case.

With a lot of hope,

Yours truly,

Shailesh Gandhi

Chairman, IITB Alumni Association

Mob: 09820027305.

Key issues raised by Stayendra Dubey which have not been answered

Satyendra’s letter gave the names Centrodosity 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. He also talks of upto Rs. 40 crores being given to a single contractor as mobilisation advance, which is evidently diverted, -partly to pay the bribes. Equipment advances are also being given.

There is no justification for giving advances to Contractors. If they do not have the financial capacity to do the jobs they should not be awarded the contracts. The buyer is the Government of India, and the corrupt practices highlighted by Satyendra are probably a routine in most of the Infrastructure projects. Customs and excise duty waivers mean that the budget of India indirectly subsidises the work and makes mechanization appear cheaper than it really it is. Needless to say that the equipment stays on and is used elsewhere. This in turn leads to making mechanization appear far cheaper than it really is. Why is it that no serious investigation has been done on the detailed allegations made by Satyendra? The true reason is that they point to a serious rot in the entire rush for big projects.

Raj Kamal Jha ending his letter to Satyendra Dubey in a moving ‘Ode to a Mate’ wrote, ‘But the next time-and there will be a next time- there is a Satyendra Dubey, from IIT or wherever, who walks into a lonely place to blow the whistle, he will look right and left. He will look over his shoulder, it will be cold, the wind will blow hard, and he will then look up. And he will see you shining there.’

Yes Satyendra,-he will see you and take the right lesson- honesty will not be tolerated. If he is foolish enough to sacrifice his life, we will first make a National past time of honouring him, but ultimately desecrate the memory of his death.

The issue is not only about the Indra of Satya. The minimum ethical stand we need to take is that when as Institutions, Organisations, or Media, we do not compromise our public stand on honesty. Whenever these Institutions deviate, others must challenge them. It is far better to admit mistakes than to pretend we are infallible. To refuse to admit errors is becoming a characteristic of our entire leadership from the political, bureaucratic, business or intellectual class. If all the institutions which honoured Satyendra’s memory raise their voice,-at least for the sake of their own credibility,- the truth will come out. This can have a positive effect on economy and good governance, leading to a more ethical, sustainable and equitable society. Honesty is a value, which is basic to the well being of a society. As individuals and as a society, we have to bring it to the center stage of our National agenda and debate. In the first five decades of the last century, Satyagraha was the prime mover of our nation. The primary reason for the affluence of the Developed Nations is also an insistence on Honesty privately and publicly. In India when Business or professional interests are at stake, people bond together to safeguard themselves and get more. The organized workers have also managed to defend their own turf. Who will defend Satya?

And without Satya can there be a better India?

shailesh gandhi

June 7, 2006 Posted by | Ashutosh Aman Mishra, Atal Bansal, Kalyan Panda [Implanter] Writes, martyr SKD, skdf letdown | Leave a comment

SKDF did not follow up with PRESS and COURTS to turn the Satyendra Dubey letter to PMO dated November 11, 2002 in to a charge sheet. Shows FAILURE of Ashutosh Aman Mishra and Atal Bansal of SKDF.

PRESS did not turn the Satyendra Dubey letter to PMO dated November 11, 2002 in to a charge sheet.
November 11, 2002 Letter to PMO
martyr SKD wrote – A dream project of unparalleled importance to the Nation
Read the following:
N. Ram Of The Hindu Is No Ram
Sucheta has taken the lead in exposing the professional misconduct of press. Press has very incompetently covered development and economy related issues.
N. Ram of The Hindu is No Ram, he may try to appear to be champion of freedom of press but he is no better than his rivals in business.
I have tried to raise very critical issues like Kaveri dispute or Narmada dispute for example but none in the press dared to cover it. Example:- When most of the water in KRS dam shall be lost on way to farmers why Supreme Court wanted to release barely minimum amount for Karnataka’s priority needs. Firstly press doesn’t have the skilled reporters and secondly, like most politicians, doesn’t want to convey bitter truth to people.
Press as the “Balancing Pillar” of democracy and efficient governance is as feeble as other three Indian constitutional pillars, legislature, executive and judiciary.
Press seldom challenges the bad decisions of the government when it does; it addresses the public outrage due to certain event.
Indian Express was the only newspaper that extensively covered Dubey story. But it did not turn the Satyendra Dubey letter in to a charge sheet.
In India role of judiciary in keeping a check on the functioning of legislature and executive is limited there press has to fill the gap.
On policy issues judiciary has limited powers and procedure is slow and complicated but press can respond instantly the way Corruptionfree responds.
There is huge credibility gap that press has to bridge.
Ravinder Singh
—————–
Under N. Ram, the Hindu becomes a ‘sorry’ paper
Posted by: “Sucheta Dalal” suchetadalal@yahoo.com
Tue Jun 6, 2006 12:21 pm (PST)

Hello all

Freedom of press?

This is a horrifying new trend that will affect the entire media and ultimately freedom of __expression in the country.

Are editors/owners crawling when asked to bend? Do they really need to bend in order to get advertising?

Has survival become so tough for the media?

If things are so bad with print, you can imagine how much worse it is in the audio-visual media.

Everybody needs to think about this. Would appreciate reactions.

best
Sucheta

Under N. Ram, the Hindu becomes a ’sorry’ paper ARVIND SWAMINATHAN writes from Madras:
Editors, reporters and correspondents at The Hindu are in a state of shock and disbelief today after another grovelling apology to an automotive major from their card-carrying Editor-in-Chief N. Ram appeared on the pages of the paper.

“In the Open Page article by R.S. Anand titled ‘The way we showcase India abroad’, a sweeping and baseless statement was made about a Kirloskar product, suggesting it was outdated. The Hindu apologises for this unwarranted assertion and withdraws the Open Page article from its website,” the apology signed by the editor-in-chief reads.

The “offending” piece by Anand, a student at RWTH in Aachen, Germany, comprised run-of-the-mill reflections on the Hannover Fair, and contained just two references to Kirloskar—both of them in the same paragraph.

“Companies such as HMT, BHEL, Kirloskar, etc, participated in the (Hannover) fair. My fellow German students were shocked to see the engine displayed by Kirloskar which was designed a century ago. They asked me, ‘Are they still using this one?’’ the “offending” paragraph went.

That was enough for Ram, otherwise a champion of free ___expression on television and in public forums, to go out crawling on all fours.

“Just what does our editor find so sweeping and baseless about that statement,” asked a senior editor of the paper on condition of anonymity. “And anyway it is not the author’s statement, it is the quote of a German visitor.”

Hindu staffers are bemused that Ram, otherwise particular about details, should not have published the date of publication of the offending piece—May 21, 2006—in the apology. “It’s almost as if he doesn’t want readers who have back copies of the paper at home to go back and check,” a staffer said.

At the same time, many senior editors and journalists within and outside the Hindu are horrified that the whole article has been axed from the paper’s website although the references to Kirloskar were contained in only one paragraph.

“Look at the irony. We lecture the world on why Da Vinci Code should not be censored. We lecture the world on why Fanaa should not be blacked out. And yet, because some rich family is offended, we remove the whole piece from the website. Is only the paragraph at fault or the whole piece? And what will the author tell his German friends about The Hindu? That the paper has very elastic journalistic ethics, depending on who is offended ?” the editor asked.

There is yet a third angle to the apology which is that it comes over and above the head of the much-vaunted Reader’s Editor, K. Narayanan, whom Ram has been projecting as the panacea of all journalistic ills in the country.

“Was Kirloskar’s complaint brought to the notice of the Reader’s Editor? If not, why ? If so, what was the substance of the complaint—that somebody had a view that the advertiser did not like? So, is Ram the Advertiser’s Editor? Doesn’t this undermine the position of the Reader’s Editor,” a staffer asked.

The Kirloskar apology is the second inside 20 months since Ram displaced Malini Parthasarathy and his brother N. Ravi in a bloodless palace coup.

On October 20, 2004, Ram published this: “The contents, tone and language of ‘Kudos to Tata Motors’ by C. Manmohan Reddy (Business Review, The Hindu, October 18, 2004) are highly inappropriate. The Hindu conveys its deep regrets to Mahindra and Mahindra and also to Kotak Mahindra, ICICI Bank, and Citibank for the publication of the article.”

In that case, all the “offending” piece did was to lambast Mahindra and Mahindra for showing a “singular lack of responsibility towards the environment”.

“They choose to sell Bharat Stage I versions of the vehicle in large numbers in many of the 11, large and environmentally sensitive, cities where all the other automotive manufacturers have switched to BS II versions—all to save about Rs. 5,000 to 6,000 on very profitable SUVs that cost nearly Rs. 8 lakhs, on the road,” Reddy wrote.

That was enough for Ram to apologise to M&M and the auto finance companies. However unlike in the Kirloskar case, the offending M&M piece continues to remain on the paper’s website along with the apology two days later.

Media watchers say they are not surprised that both the apologies have gone out to automotive companies, which are big advertisers on the pages of The Hindu and many of which are located in Tamil Nadu.

What they find hilarious is that a committed communist should be so servile and obsequious to capitalists.

“Here’s a paper that day in and day out extols Jyoti Basu and Buddhadeb Bhattacharya, Prakash and Brinda Karat. And yet to see it saying sorry for such minor journalistic indiscretions, if they are indiscretions, suggests duplicity, if not plain hypocrisy,” says a journalist who has seen better days under G. Kasturi.
__________________________________________________

June 7, 2006 Posted by | Ashutosh Aman Mishra, Atal Bansal, Govt. of INDIA, Kalyan Panda [Implanter] Writes, martyr SKD, skdf filings, skdf letdown | Leave a comment

One out of several blunders of Moderator of SKDF Yahoogroup which led to martyr SKD’s brother to write May 14th 2006 letter to close SKDF

SKDF Message No 6071 Approved by Kalyan Panda. [ one of the BLUNDERS of Moderator Kalyan Panda in SKDF Yahoogroup which led to Brother Dhananjay to write May 14th 2006 letter]

SKDF Yahoogroup Message No 6071 Approved by Kalyan Panda.

 

“lagta hey megha ko apni maa bana liye hey kya ? kanha bhagwaan ram aur kanha voh bhikharin jo pharen ke fund ki rotiyo ke tukdo pe palti hey. you are a stupid jerk comparing that bastered megha with lord Ram

 

    Itni ijjat to tune agar apni real maa ki ki hoti to kam se kam tuje us ka ashirward to milta bhale. shayad voh bechari tumhe megha ki tarah kuch roti ke tukde na de sake lekin ashirwad to jaroor deti. tumhare jaise jerk suvvar is desh ka khate hey,pharen ka fund lete hey aur isi desh ke khilaaf bhaunkte rahte hey. saale tum jaise log paise ya kisi ko impress karne ke liye apni maa to bech hi sakte ho lekin apna baap b badal sakte hey.

 

   ja ghus ja  us megha ke pallu main aur us ki saari pakad ke naach jaise voh nachaaye vaise. tum ya megha jaise 1000 pille b aajayenge to b bandh hoga hoga n jaroor hoga.”

June 7, 2006 Posted by | Kalyan Panda [Implanter] Writes | Leave a comment