By A Representative
A right to information applicant has suggested that Gujarat chief minister
Anandiben Patel, one of the closest confidantes of Prime Minister Narendra Modi,
did not declare her position as director in a non-profit company in the
affidavit she filed before the Election Commission of India ahead of the December
2012 Gujarat state assembly elections. The company, according to the RTI applicant Roshan Shah, who brought this to light, was registered as a section
25 company under the Companies Act with the registrar of companies (RoC), making it a non-profit organisation.
“Non-profit company does not mean that it does not receive
funds from any sources, and it also does not mean that the directors do not take
out money from its funds”, Shah insisted, adding, “Patel contested the Gujarat assembly
elections from Ghatlodia constituency in Ahmedabad. In her affidavit Anandiben
Patel did not disclose her interests in Gramsheel Women Empowerment,
established as a section 25 company under the Companies Act on March 29, 2011. She is one of its directors.”
Pointing out that “this is the only company registered in
RoC in which Patel is director, and was Director at the time of filing her
nominations for the Gujarat state assembly elections in 2012”, Shah adds, “Hiding
material and substantial fact in affidavit is an offence for any elected representative,
and Patel by not disclosing this information in her affidavit is liable to be disqualified.”
Shah has further alleged that the RTI query has “revealed” that
the Gramshree Women Empowerment company has not filed balance sheet with the
RoC either ever since its inception. “Usually RoC levies quarterly fine if
anyone fails to file return, but it seems that the RoC – because of her
political stature – has not levied any fine on the company either.”
Shah wonders, “The RTI response questioning the details of
fine did not provide any response from the public information officer… If the
lawmakers themselves hide material facts and fail to file balance sheet and
follow corporate rules, why should they get separate special treatment compared
to others?” He adds, “Concealing of information in affidavit is substantial
since this is the only firm in which Patel is director. This is a gross offence.”
Finding more discrepancies in the affidavit, Shah says, interestingly,
in the 2007 affidavit, Patel signed in
Gujarati but in 2012 she signed in English. It also brings to question as to
how many signatures one can use as per the law and shouldn't the returning
officer verify the signature on record and reject the nomination for signature
mismatch.”
When contacted, Congress leader Arjun Modhwadia denied that
the RTI was filed on the party’s instructions. “I was told a TV channel carried
the news. We are investigating. An RTI applicant appears has brought this to
light. We will take appropriate steps after consulting legal opinion in the
matter”, he said. There is so far no word on it from the chief minister's office.
Comments