A Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, comprising Justices U. Durga Prasad Rao and A.V. Ravindra Babu, on October 13 (Friday) ordered that notices be served to 44 respondents, including former Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu and TDP State president K. Atchannaidu, in the PIL filed by former MP Vundavalli Arun Kumar seeking a CBI probe into the skill development scam case.
The PIL was posted for further hearing after four weeks.
Mr. Naidu was the Chief Minister when the scam had allegedly taken place and Mr. Atchannaidu was then the Minister for Skill Development, Entrepreneurship and Innovation.
Mr. Arun Kumar said in the petition that the investigation required to be thorough and objective to unearth the complicated web of shell companies and sham transactions of money laundering.
The primary case was that contrary to the government policy and orders, a tripartite agreement had been entered into by the government agencies and private parties, and even before they (the private parties) contributed money towards the project, the government released its share of 10% of the project cost (₹371 crore).
There were many other irregularities in the implementation of the project, whose total cost was pegged at ₹3,281 crore, the petitioner alleged.
The money was released as per the persistent instructions of Mr. Naidu and Mr. Atchannaidu in “blatant disregard to objections raised by senior bureaucrats.”
The entire transaction was at the instance of Siemens-Pune and DesignTech, and the officials and public servants of the State, Mr. Arun Kumar alleged.
He insisted that a case of this magnitude with allegations of a deep, prior conspiracy at the top echelons of political and executive power deserved an investigation that was insulated from the political debate surrounding such matters of high public interest.
Besides, as the case had national ramifications due to the money trail that was spread in different States, it should be handed over to the CBI, which had the expertise to unravel such crimes, he observed.
Appearing for the State, Advocate General S. Sriram said he had no objection to transferring the case to the CBI.
