Dear Mr. TATA,

You are becoming annoying now!! Your 7 page reply with attachments from 2002 is Irrelevent and you sound desperate! And your defending a spineless man is even more annoying! 

How do u explain this which is on the CAG report!!!

 Tata Group is a beneficiary of out-of-turn spectrum. In fact, one of the biggest of them all.

It is a fact admitted by the Government on affidavit that 575 applications were received for 2G spectrum by 01 October, 2007. Using an illegal and arbitrary cutoff date, Mr Raja processed only 122 applications received till 25 September, 2007. 110 were rejected and 343 applications were put in abeyance. Given the fact that there is no 2G spectrum available, these applications received till 01 October, 2007 (within the date represented by the Government) have now been put in the dustbin. In fact, the TRAI had already recommended on 11 May 2010 that no more UASL license with bundled spectrum can be given. This means that these 343 applications will never be processed and will never see spectrum.

In the meantime, 19 days after these 575 applications were received, the dual technology policy was announced through a press release by Mr Raja. The Tatas put in their dual technology applications around 22 October. So, in effect, their application went in three weeks after the 575 2G applications were received.

Today, Tatas already have GSM spectrum allocated and GSM service launched in most of the circles - But the 343 applications submitted three weeks before the Tata Group have neither been processed nor have any chance of ever being processed - so much for First Come, First Serve.

 

 Mr. Tata,

There is nothing more to embarrass the Prime Minister. He has already been too embarrassed by all that has been happening in the 2G front. There is nothing embarrassing to the PM in what Rajeev Chandrashekar has written about. The supreme court's observation on the PM's silence has already done enough embarrassment. More than that the people of this country have asked the PM enough number of questions which had been damn embarrassing - if not for the congress party, at least to a person like the PM's stature.

Everybody is trying to come across as pure, pristine, virgin-like, washed in milk. As soon as that happens, my antennas go up. What can I do - I consider myself a realist, some would say cynical - so I don't buy anyone is washed in milk and squeaky clean (teflon coated may be). Some may be more clean than others (or less dirty than others depending on how you want to look at it) but please don't insult our intelligence by coming across as squeaky clean (with no teflon coating).

Business in India cannot be conducted without greasing .... whether in small quantums or big. All that has happened with time is businesses have become smart in greasing using levels of indirection (middlemen who charge a service fee and do the dirty work) - consultants, lobbyists, PR companies, etc. Keeps our consience clean - we all know what most of the service fee being charged goes for - but like the US military - don't ask/don't tell works.

However, my view is this high corruption for me is less of an issue. It is the small, everyday, low-level, niggling, irritating and de-humanizing corruption faced by the aam-admi (and more so by the really poor workers in the unorganized sector so as to earn enough to eat) that is a major problem. It makes us all less human and lesser as a people and a nation.

Specifically, for Telecom irrespective of all the potential corruption, for the aam-admi it has been a good thing. Who could have imagined the telecom revolution we have gone thru - who could have imagined affordable access to phone to the lowest of the low. The extra money in the government exchequer would have been wasted anyways - may be this money in private hands has produced more benefits for the aam-admi.

INDIAN SCHOOL OF INTERNATIOAL STUDIES

ANNUAL EXAM: November, 2020

CLASS: Alpha

QUESTION 1:

How did India become a super power nation from a Kama-Sutra Country?

ANSWER:

By / before  16th Century, Indian Kings were busy in coupling by reading Kamasutra, then invaded the Eureopeans and the British to gather the sexually dispersed community as a country.

By 21st Century, Indian politicians and businesses were busy in corrupting, then came Chinese to attack culturally-financially-lignuistically-religiously-regionally-imbalanced-India from North East (by their own), North West (with Pakistan), and South (with Sri Lanka).

However, this time India buckled up forgetting all the differences fought the enemies to death and captured Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and part of China to have become the first super power in Asia.

Spectrum is a scarce natural resource and the best way of alloting it is auction/ tender process. This ensures that national exchequer derives best possible revenue and the bidders whether new players or existing ones get fair chance.Raja had the choice of auction for 2G which would have seen the new players and existing ones like Tata bidding on level playing field. Instead Raja favoured some new entrants by arbitrarily advancing the cust off date for application while Tata and Rel comm got spectrum at 2001 prices in 2008 on basis of so called USL policy which was a charade to sell spectrum at 2001 prices.

Hence Rajiv Chandrashekhar is right that Tata paid only Rs 1651 crore for something which should have costed much more . The loser, the tax payers of India.

Raja's misdeeds were widely known by Jan 2008 still in May 2009 , Mr Tata's advisors were hectically lobbying for Raja to be reappointed as telecom minister. Fact remains that Tata did benefit at the cost of tax payers of India irrespective of whether Rajeev Chandrashekar is BJP agent or not.

Tatas are a jewel in the Indian crown.

I fully expect that corrupt thugs on payroll of corrupt politicians to attack the Tatas.

This looks like a response  which questions Chandresekhar's credibility as the letter writer than actually rebutting the content of the letter.  That reflects the sad reality of the situation where everyone is involved in something or the other. By the way, have anybody seen this recent BBC poll on corruption all across the world

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-11954667

Very interesting grouping for India.

I posted this elsewhere -

The man who should be speaking is losing credibility by the day by keeping quiet. Tata who should have had the good sense to keep quiet when a single tape was aired (and would have soon been forgotten) is losing credibility by the day by opening his mouth when he should have kept quiet. Instead he has tried to suppress the tapes (what does he have to hide?), made a stupid speech on TV (I'm good everyone else is bad) and has now openly taken sides in a political battle.

Good luck Mr Tata. If I was one of your shareholders, I would be giving sell orders to my brokers.

Are other two big fishes of this game, Anil Ambani of Reliance Communications and Sunil Mittal of Bharti Enterprises?

 http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/business/Rajeev-Chandrasekhar-responds-to-Tata-s-letter/Article1-636375.aspx

Chandrasekhar's reply to Tatas reply. 

Rajya Sabha MP Rajeev Chandrasekhar has written a letter in response to Ratan Tata's reaction to his open letter. Read the full text. Dear Mr Tata, I welcome your joining this debate. It is an important one and needs to be settled in full public view. Unfortunately, your response is a typical one that ducks the main issues and instead attempts to shoot the messenger! I am only disappointed, but no longer surprised, that in sharp contrast to my efforts to go out of the way to keep this debate relating to facts and policy discussions - your letter is intensely personal, attributes feeble motives (including amusing Political ones) and most unbecoming of the House of Tatas. I can only think that this is a lapse in good judgment. I particularly find your self-appointed defence of the Prime Minister and Government very irrelevant.

Nevertheless, I promise to keep my response dignified and steadfastly refuse to fall to your level of personal attacks.

On facts, your letter is not just exceptionally weak, but in fact, refuses to engage on the issues that I had raised - the yawning gap between what you say in public and what your companies do. While those remain unanswered, I will certainly reply shortly with my response. I promise to rebut your allegations, claims and innuendo - chapter and verse in the public domain.

Best regards,

Rajeev Chandrasekhar

Member of Parliament

New Delhi

09 December, 2010

 

Kaun Behti Ganga me haath dho raha hai ya kitne log Behti Ganga me haath dho rahe hai