Reply to Show Cause Notice : May 11, 2207
Shri R. A. Rajeev
Additional Municipal Commissioner (City)
Municipal Head Office
Extension Building, 3rd floor
Mahapalika Marg,
Fort, Mumbai 400001
Dear Sir,
Sub: Your Show-Cause Notice reg. BMC MOU
Ref: AMC / C / 1276 / SWM dt. 4-05-2007
With reference to your above letter, we state as under:
1. As you are aware, this is an old matter, which had been dealt with and laid to rest via the 6-monthly “Review of the MCGM – NGO Council MoU” in June 2006 by the Additional Municipal Commissioner (City). (Copy again enclosed for your ready reference.)
2. Prior to this, on 6th March, 2006, the AMC (City) has clearly stated MCGM’s position in response to an RTI application. (Copy enclosed.)
3. On March 18, 2006, the AMC City had also publicly addressed this issue via the karmayog yahoo group. The comments therein are extremely pertinent. (Copy enclosed.)
4. In response to the May 16th, 2006, letter by the NGOs that you have referenced, we had sent our reply to the Municipal Commissioner on 25th May, 2006. (Copy enclosed.)
5. After you assumed the office of AMC, we had got your appointment with great difficulty. In that meeting on 12th July, 2006, you referred to these objections. Accordingly, the NGO Council met on 4th August, 2006, to discuss these issues. Appropriate resolutions were passed and conveyed to the Municipal Commissioner with a copy to you on 16th August, 2006. (Copy enclosed.)
6. On 23rd September, 2006, this issue was raised via an article in Times of India. When we brought this to the notice of the Municipal Commissioner and requested for an appointment to discuss the matter, we were conveyed that it was a non-issue. (Copy enclosed.)
7. On 12th January, 2007, we prepared our internal review, and sent it to the Municipal Commissioner. (Copy enclosed.)
We would like to further state as under:
1. In our one and only meeting that we could have with you i.e. on 12th July 2006, where we had met to discuss the BMC-NGO Council MoU and possible areas of collaboration, you had stated that you had little time to work with NGOs since this kept initiatives at an incremental level, and that you believed that sweeping and sudden changes were required for the city, and so you would not like to work together as envisaged in the MOU. And, accordingly, you have been behaving as if the MOU never existed even though the NGO Council had worked closely with MCGM to frame the Solid Waste Rules, etc.
2. The date of your letter / show cause notice viz. 4th May 2007 is revealing. It is almost one and a half years after the BMC and NGO Council MoU was signed, and almost 11 months after you yourself have taken charge as Additional Municipal Commissioner, and exactly a day after Shri Joseph’s term as Municipal Commissioner got over. This would imply that there are reasons other than the ones stated in your letter, behind this move, and it would be appropriate that these be stated publicly.
3. It would appear that you have some personal issue vis-a-vis the NGO Council or its existence or the MOU, and thus it would be more appropriate if some impartial third-party were involved in going through the documentation and reasons why these NGOs have raised objections. We have an entire set of correspondence with these NGOs which shows clearly that they are lying.
4. We act in an extremely transparent manner and all correspondence of and regarding the NGO Council is on public display at www.karmayog.org/ngocouncil/.
5. A Memorandum of Understanding between parties is due to a desire between the parties to formalise their interactions and that such initiatives are not left to the whim and fancy of succeeding individuals. We have been instrumental with MCGM, in the framing of two new Rules by MCGM. Without the close interaction and collaboration with the NGO Council , these Rules would not have got framed. We have submitted detailed and innovative recommendations on other matters also to MCGM. It is because MCGM saw the value we bring to the table, that MCGM proposed the MOU. It is regrettable that even MOU’s like this one, which are not based on any monetary or material benefit to any party, remain un-honoured due to the whims of individuals.
6. We believe that the MoU is important for the holistic development of the city, for tackling the various huge problems that the city faces, and for creating fair, practical, doable, enforceable, policies and procedures which can generate citizen support, and for reducing corruption, and it is necessary to involve concerned citizens and organisations in the planning, implementation and monitoring of all such efforts in a genuinely transparent and inclusive manner. This is clearly enunciated in the MOU. It appears that you are uncomfortable with open discussions, and hence have been seeking to terminate the MOU.
7. This issue has been raised by these NGOs through Corporators, the media, ex-bureacrats, etc. The Municipal Commissioner and the Additional Municipal Commissioner (City) duly considered all the objections raised by having personal meetings with all of these, explained the MCGM position to them, clearly understood the issues involved from all angles, and closed the chapter.
It is surprising, or maybe not, that you seek to rake it up again. We do hope that wiser counsel shall prevail within MCGM.
Yours Sincerely,
Vinay R. Somani
B. Tech. (IIT -B), MBA (Harvard)
Convenor
NGO Council
Encl: as above
cc: Shri Jairaj Phatak, Municipal Commissioner