August 18, 2003
The School Issue is Far From Over, Now Police Investigation likely
Who Disapproved 10 Respected Members of Indian School Board? The new Ambassador? The Minister of Education? Is there any law under which an entire Board can be removed? asks Monjuula S. Sooresh in a strongly worded letter to the new ambassador.
Interestingly the law enforcement authorities are looking into the matter to see the role of some,(we dont call corrupt) officials in supporting the private school barons. It is learned that the officials of a particular ministry who were moving in a snails pace are very fast now to clear a new list of board members proposed by ...you know who..
While it took several months for the former patron to get one file moved, things have changed overnight when the new patron has assumed charge. What is the secret behind this miracle?? In many instances, the lower level staff in the concerned ministry will just ensure that the papers submitted from the former patron are either "missing" or "not found". Or files will not be moved because of protocol issues.
Shri Bhupinder Singh, August 13, 2003
First Secretary,
Embassy of India, Muscat.
Sultan ate.
After Compliments,
I acknowledge receipt of your letter ref. no. Mus / 327 /4 2003 dt. August 12, 2003 faxed at the close of business wherein you have informed me of "the official communication from the authorities concerned of the Sultanate, which does not give the required approval".
I would appreciate clarifications as I have been asked to provide these details by the ROP in view of the following:
1 As intimated to HE the Ambassador on August 10, 2003, the ROP are investigating the 'organized illegal businesses' operating in violation of His Majesty Sultan Qaboos bin Said's laws, and against the interests of both the Government of Oman and the Indian Community. The basis for these unauthorised businesses operating under the Embassy's umbrella are the of 2 illegal agreements favouring Messrs Mohamed Ali and Kanaksi Khimji. As you are aware these 'agreements' have allowed these businessmen to supersede the laws of Oman for the last 11 years.
2 The enlightened Omani Government granted permission for "community" schools exclusively to provide educational facilities for the Indian Community and not for profiteering by businessmen. The community has been granted benefits by His Majesty Sultan Qaboos bin Said e.g. waiving of income taxes for Community schools under the Embassy. However, these businessmen are misusing these benefits for illegal profits.
3 Consequently, actions by the BoD for the first time in the history of the school system to ensure legal compliance through restoring the schools to the community are being obstructed. These businessmen have been challenging the Laws & Law Enforcement mechanism of Oman. Documentary and other evidence exposes the organised plan to eliminate the BoD constituted on June 22, 2003, with the sole objective of a reversing the action taken to eliminate the illegal "businesses".
4 Therefore, the ROP has directed me to seek official clarification with respect to the following:
4.1 The BoD list forwarded to MoE on June 22, 2003 was with regard to approval of the undersigned's and Dr. Dalal's elevation to the position of Chairperson and Vice - Chairman respectively and the new members inducted to the BoD. Members in the above list already approved and functioning since December 2002, constitute the "authorised Board for a period of 2 years" under the provisions of the Constitution Art 6.4 and reiterated by MoE's directives ref. D.T. Kh /544 of 12/5/2002.
Therefore please confirm / clarify that the "constitution of a new BoD" (ref your letter of August 12 addressed to Mr. Mathur) refers to the new members included in the June 22 list, whilst the approved BoD members such as the undersigned, Dr. Dalal, Mr. Thakker etc. remain with status unchanged as BoD members in the new BoD being constituted. As you are aware, under the prevailing regulations, there is no provision or precedence for withdrawing approval of approved BoD members by the MoE.
4.2 The source of the "official communication" - the reference number, date and the Ministry issuing the 'communication';
4.3 Does the 'communication' categorically not approve the BoD list of new members or only the appointment of the Chairperson?
4.4 Is the 'communication' in writing? If yes kindly forward a copy of the same as has always been the procedure in force to-date.
4.5 Have the 'authorities concerned' refused the approval? Any indication under what provisions of the law such an unprecedented decision has been taken? Have any reasons been mentioned? 'that does not give the required approval' is not the same as refusal; e.g. has the other office - bearer Dr. Dalal been approved as Vice - Chairman ?
4.6 There is no provision in the existing laws which can reject /invalidate the entire list of BoD members nominated by the outgoing accredited Ambassador during his tenure in office. These actions not only contravene the laws, but delay/ obstruct the undersigned's initiatives through the BoD to eliminate violations of the laws.
Considering the fact that the list of new members forwarded on June 22 is constituted of independent and outstanding professionals (e.g. Mr. Bhutani heading BHEL- India's pride in the field of technology) from the Private and Public sectors who cannot be influenced by any of the vested interests, have any reasons been given for the unprecedented deviation from the laws to deny approval ?
4.7 Copies of the abuse of the media to carry out the character assassination, defamatory and criminal attack on the undersigned was sent to the MoE officials including Madam Fatima Hinai on July 27. Criminal investigations in respect of this case require clarification whether any reason for not giving the required approval for the undersigned's nomination as Chairperson has been communicated by the MoE / "authorities concerned". This clarification is relevant on account of documented assurances from H.E. Minister of Education on June 17, of urgent approval being accorded and the fact that there was no communication for nearly 2 months. Immediately following the defamation campaign the 'communication of no approval' conveys linkages.
I would be grateful for an urgent clarification on the above so that I may communicate the same to the ROP at the earliest.
Assuring you of my support in any area deemed necessary by the Embassy and,
With every good wish,
Monjuula S. Sooresh
Cc: ROP HQ, Qurum
