CAG says a defence ministry panel report stated in March 2015 that Dassault was not L1 in the original bidding process for 126 jets, and so a contract could not be signed with it.
A CAG report points out the Letter of Comfort means India will have to settle a breach of agreement first through arbitration with French vendors and not the government.
Parallel negotiations for purchase of Rafale fighter jets were believed to have been conducted by the Prime Minister’s Office, The Hindu report reveals.
The PIL seeks that all offset contracts with private organisations after 2005 be disclosed by the government, and must be quashed.
New Delhi: Amidst the...
French investigative journal Mediapart has accessed an “internal document” of Dassault Aviation, the makers of the Rafale jets. It states the firm’s joint venture...
MoSPI proposes to remove closed factories from IIP sample, aiming for truer picture of India’s industrial health in upcoming 2022–23 base series. Plan open to public feedback until 25 November.
Bihar is blessed with a land more fertile for revolutions than any in India. Why has it fallen so far behind then? Constant obsession with politics is at the root of its destruction.
If the government has paid higher price it can only be because of the incompetence ( Do not know if it is crime) or because of vested interest ( if proven, it is crime) It appears as of now there is no material to indicate corruption or vested interest. If any material surfaces in future surely no past judgement can prevent investigation, that is obvious even without being said in the judgement.
Two ex-ministers, a renowned lawyer supported by a major media house, all with great experience in successfully exposing financial wrongdoings did not make a sound case but exposed themselves to motives other than just going after the corrupt.
It looks like the matter rests for now, unless the investigative journalists come up with solid indications of financial wrongdoings.
What is this joke? The minority judge’s judgment is just an opinion, it has been overridden by the majority judgment. How can a part of the minority judgment be operational?
If the government has paid higher price it can only be because of the incompetence ( Do not know if it is crime) or because of vested interest ( if proven, it is crime) It appears as of now there is no material to indicate corruption or vested interest. If any material surfaces in future surely no past judgement can prevent investigation, that is obvious even without being said in the judgement.
Two ex-ministers, a renowned lawyer supported by a major media house, all with great experience in successfully exposing financial wrongdoings did not make a sound case but exposed themselves to motives other than just going after the corrupt.
It looks like the matter rests for now, unless the investigative journalists come up with solid indications of financial wrongdoings.
What is this joke? The minority judge’s judgment is just an opinion, it has been overridden by the majority judgment. How can a part of the minority judgment be operational?