[ad_1]
Delhi’s Vigilance Minister Atishi.
Delhi’s Vigilance Minister Atishi.
Dwarka Expressway: After preliminary investigation in the alleged corruption case related to Delhi Chief Secretary Naresh Kumar, Vigilance Minister in the state government Atishi has submitted a 650-page report to CM Arvind Kejriwal today. Atishi has found some irregularities in the initial investigation in the land acquisition for Dwarka Expressway. It said that Delhi’s CS Naresh Kumar has given a profit of Rs 850 crore to the company associated with his son. At the same time, after the report was submitted to the CM, politics has also heated up.
According to media reports, the company of the Chief Secretary’s son had purchased this land near Dwarka Expressway in 2015 for a total of Rs 75 lakh. Now that land has been acquired at an expensive price. In this the secretary’s son benefited illegally. According to this report, the Chief Secretary has also given government contracts to many other companies of his son. All this will be investigated thoroughly.
The report also reveals a conspiracy by senior officials of Delhi’s vigilance department, including Chief Secretary Naresh Kumar, to understate the scale of the scam by Rs 312 crore, while the actual compensation is around Rs 850 crore.
Senior IAS officers came to the defense of the Chief Secretary
During a press conference on Monday, Delhi Government’s Divisional Commissioner Ashwini Kumar dismissed the allegations against Chief Secretary Naresh Kumar as baseless and termed them as motivated by dirty politics. He said that the allegations being leveled against the Chief Secretary are aimed at tarnishing his image. These allegations are also being made because they are taking action in the corruption case.
Ashwini Kumar further said that there is talk of extending the tenure of the Chief Secretary. Efforts are being made to tarnish his image regarding this issue. There is no connection between the land owners and the Chief Secretary. All allegations against him are baseless and defamatory. Also, he asked the government whether they had any evidence against the Chief Secretary.
[ad_2]