In a blatant violation of Major Port Trusts Act, a section of the management of the Kolkata Port Trust (KoPT) has, without any prior approval of the Central Government and the Shipping Ministry, come to an understanding with the Bengal Government to construct the “Eye of Kolkata” along the lines of the “Eye of london” on the lands of the KoPT on Hooghly river front, Port sources have alleged.
According to Haldia Dock Officers’ Forum sources, vested interests in the KoPT have suppressed parts of the resolution taken in the Board meeting dated September 5 that was held to discuss the issue of coming to an agreement with the Mamata Government. This resolution reportedly opined against such an agreement between the Port and the State without the Centre’s nod.
According to a senior functionary of the HDOF, in the Board meeting on September 5 out of 14 Board members only 7 were present when the matter came up for discussion. Two members namely Prabir Sarkar, labour Trustee and DIG Coast Guard NV Narsimha clearly stated quoting the Chief legal Officer of the KoPT that “Approval of the Central Government was necessary” in such cases.
“The Chief legal Officer had opined that there was no provision in the MPT Act empowering the Board to enter into any Joint Venture with the State Government to award concession by inviting tender,” HDFO general secretary RK Burman said, adding “it was further opined by the Chief legal Officer that the proposal would require sanction of the Central Government under Section 42(3A) of the MPT Act.”
However, the draft resolution of the said Board meeting “has been prepared and circulated where the decision of the Board to take Central Government’s approval in the matter has been safely skipped and the proposal has been shown to have been approved by the Board with the Intimation/Information to Shipping Ministry,” he said, alleging such Special Purpose Vehicles could only be created by the approval of the Centre and the Cabinet.
Pointing at the “mala fide intentions of the KoPT management while preparing Minutes of the Board Meetings” he alleged that “the Board approved one thing in the Minutes and something else was recorded setting aside the actual decision of the Board.” He added that this was “not only a breach of trust but also a blatant misuse of Government office.”