887 Public Accounts Committee of Indian Parliament should publish the questions it has asked the Governor of RBI, Mr. Urjit Patel

The inquiry and questioning which Public Accounts Committee of Indian Parliament is making, should not end up as a damp squib. On 20th January 2017, the Governor of Reserve Bank of India Mr. Urjit Patel, assisted by his team of Dy. Governors, appeared before the Public Accounts Committee, and answered their questions. Every common Indian, with the exception of millionnaires and billionnaires experienced hardships in their daily life, owing to the economic surgical strike made by Government on the 1.3 billion strong Indian Nation, in the form of demonetization of 86.4% of currency in circulation.

More than 100 people lost their lives, standing in ATM and Bank queues. Patients in hospitals could not pay their bills. Mr. Sadananda Gouda, Union Minister, himself experienced this, as a hospital did not allow him to take the dead-body of his relative, by making payment in old notes, though hospitals were expected to accept them. Parents could not pay the school fees of their children. Farmers could not pay the wages of the laborers working in their fields. Laborers, fruit and vegetable vendors, food vendors on carts, barbers etc. lost their livelihood, for nearly 50 days, because people did not have cash to pay.

Several people could not perform the wedding ceremonies of their daughters and sons, because they were not allowed to withdraw their own money from their own Bank accounts. This type of arbitrary tyrannical treatment made by Reserve Bank of India on Bank customers, was never experienced in the Economic History of India. Mr. Narendra Modi, the Hon. Prime Minister of India, avoided to be present in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, and shy of answering the questions which may be asked by Opposition.

Some people approached courts for redressal of public grievances. Unfortunately, courts too failed to come to their rescue, except making some observations.

Initially, according to News Reports, the Public Accounts Committee made a noise that it would call the Prime Minister to appear before it. Somehow, it did not dare to do so. Only the RBI Governor and some Ministry of Finance Officials appeared before it. The Public Accounts Committee should have released to Media, a printed list of questions they have asked the RBI Governor, and the Officials of the Ministry of Finance, so that people could have had a first hand of knowledge that there is somebody to ask the Powers-that-be, on what, why, how they have resorted to such a misadventure as the 86.4% Demonetization, without adequate prior preparations. The PAC should also publish verbatim, all the answers given by the RBI Governor. Publishing these questions and answers, would have brought transparency to the working of the PAC, Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.

PAC should at least publish, whether any of the following questions were asked and answers obtained from the RBI Governor, when he said that Demonetization was planned in early 2016 itself, and that regular weekly meetings were taking place with the Government.

If demonetization was really preplanned well in advance, as replied by the RBI Governor, then we must be shocked to see how shabbily it was implemented. Something which is planned well, and planned in advance, should foresee contingencies, must have a Disaster Recovery Plan, ought to pre-estimate whether it will have any adverse impact on the poorest sections.

QUESTIONS

1. Whether these meetings attended by RBI Governor, ever took notice of the aggregate stocks of Rs. 100 notes in the Currency Chests of RBI and its Agent Banks, and the Rs. 100 notes held with the public? If so, date:
2. Whether RBI Governor, or the Chair-person of SBI, has ever expressed an apprehension that there would be chaos, because Banks do not have adequate stocks of Rs. 100 notes, that ATMs are not calibrated to handle Rs. 2,000 notes, and the new Rs. 500 notes. If so date:
3. Whether the Officials of the Finance Ministry / PMO / Finance Minister have replied to the apprehensions of the RBI Governor, or the Chairperson SBI. What was the reply given from the Government side? If so date:

To continue. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.

846 Some questions which Mr. Urjit Patel may have to answer, now that there is no need for secrecy about demonetisation

Now, 30 days of demonetization of currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1,000 have elapsed. Need for secrecy, we can say, has elapsed with the afflux of time. There is no sight of amelioration of the currency problems of Indians, even after these 30 days, because RBI could replenish only approx. Rs. 400,000 crore (Rs. 4 trillion) THAT TOO MOSTLY HIGH DENOMINATION RS. 2,000 , of the total Rs. 15.44 trillion worth currency surrendered by public to Bank. The money deposited by public with banks from Nov. 9, 2016 to date, mostly represents their transaction money for various activities such as 1. purchase of essential commodities 2. carrying out agricultural operations 3. carrying on small business activities 4. working capital of small scale industries 5. day-to-day transaction money of wholesale traders. The Rs. 15.44 trillion is not going to stay with Banks, as is being predicted by experts. Reason: Most of it, represents transaction money. People were forced to surrender to Banks, under legal coercion and duress of losing their moneys. Now, that Mr. Urjit Patel says that the decision to demonetize is a well-thought-out detail-deliberated exercise not done in haste, it will be appropriate and reasonable for him to answer some simple questions. We the people of India, its hoi polloi believe that the Government of India and RBI are very sincere and are not lying. We only seek some communication gaps to be filled-up so that there a consensus ad idem can result, leading to greater harmony.

Some of the money deposited by others into Jan Dhan Accounts, may also not be black money. It might have been a consequence of a panicky reaction because an environment was created by speeches of Great men, that all the Rs. 500 and Rs. 1,000 denominations will become "waste paper" and garbage. This panicky reaction can also be seen in some innocent or timid people throwing their Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 notes into Ganges River. Of course, some black money might have gone into Jandhan / Regular Bank accounts of others, which Income Tax Authorities can always fish out with nets, and penalise such black-money holders.

Mr. Urjit Patel, the Governor Reserve Bank of India, is reported to have said,

"...The decision has not been taken in haste but after detailed deliberations. There had to be a high level of secrecy surrounding this decision and the fact is that such a large country was indeed taken by surprise when the decision was announced. ..."

RBI and the government are aware of problems that people are facing every day common persons in this context are at top of our radar and more dispensations are put in place to ensure that period of disruption is the minimal while we recalibrate note supply of the denominations that were not withdrawn in terms of the legal tender character.

TOP TEN QUESTIONS WHICH MR. URJIT PATEL CAN EASILY ANSWER AND HELP PUBLIC TO SUPPORT THE GOVERNMENT(S)

1. State Bank of India Mandal / Taluk level branches, and branches of other Public Sector Banks at big Centres maintain currency chests of the Reserve Bank of India, on its behalf. These Currency Chests are supposed to contain notes of denominations of Rs. 1,000, Rs. 500, Rs. 100, Rs. 50, Rs. 20, 10, Rs. 5, Rs. 2, small coins. The Currency Chest Branches at short intervals report the denomination-wise Cash abstracts of the Currency Chest to their Central Offices and Reserve Bank of India. Between Sept. 24 (date on which Mr. Urjit Patel has taken over as Governor) and Nov. 9 (Date of announcement of Demonetization), has Mr. Urjit Patel checked denomination-wise currency position All India position, State-wise position?

2. If Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 denominations represent 86% of notes in circulation which were going to be trashed, how did Mr. Urjit Patel come to an opinion that "Public are going to have some difficulties", instead of foreseeing that ECONOMY IS GOING TO COME TO A STANDSTILL?

He is not an ordinary Commerce Graduate of some common-place Indian University like Osmania University. He is an alumni of London School of Economics, an M.Phil of Oxford University, and a Doctorate-holder of Yale University. He also worked as an expert at International Monetary Fund. He is not new to RBI. He worked as Dy. Governor of RBI. Then how could he foresee only some "INCONVENIENCE TO PUBLIC" instead of "ECONOMY COMING TO A STAND-STILL"?

3. Whether the Chairperson of State Bank of India, which runs the currency chests of RBI, has been consulted about the availability of stocks of Rs. 100 notes, between Sept. 24 and Nov. 9? If so what is her reply? Did she foresee any difficulties? Or did she express her willingness to go ahead, without FORESEEING any ISSUES OF CLOSURE OF BANK ATMs and BANK CASH COUNTERS FOR ONE MONTH, with NO CASH BOARDS?

Or, whether the Chair Person of State Bank of India+ (its subsidiaries) is outside the CIRCLE OF SECRECY OF IMPENDING DEMONETIZATION? Has she been informed only on Nov. 7 or 8, 2016 or sometime near those dates?


4. Whether any of the top four (Prime Minister/ Finance Minister / Secretary, Finance Ministry / Governor, RBI) has, formally / informally, between Sept. 24 & Nov. 8, 2016, sought the opinion of the Chair Person of ICICI Bank, India's largest Private Sector Bank- Ms. Chanda Kochcher, about forthcoming demonetization, and whether ICICI foresees any problems??

This question is irrelevant in one way because, in India Private Banks do not have social responsibilities, and even if they have, they do not discharge, but they pretend to discharge.

This question also becomes relevant because, both the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister, treat the Chair Person ICICI Bank, on par with the Chair Person of State Bank of India, making them to sit on left and right sides. Considering the pivotal role played by State Bank of India (+its subsidiaries) with support from other Public Sector Banks in serving the poor of this country, SBI Chair Person, and Chair Persons of Public Sector Banks, should have been given special and privileged treatment, by meeting them separately. Making one Chair person of a Private Bank to sit on one side, and the Chair Person of the largest Bank in India to sit on other side, what message the Prime Minister, Finance Minister, Finance Secretary and RBI Governor convey?

If there are any affairs relating to the Public Sector Banks to be discussed, they ought not to be discussed in Combined Meetings of both Private Sector and Public Sector Banks.

IS/WAS the Chairperson ICICI Bank within or outside the Circle of Secrecy of Demonetization? This question is also important from another angle. On 22.3.2013, RBI gave clean chit to three Private Banks-- ICICI Bank, Axis Bank, and HDFC Bank, that there were only transactional errors, and that there was no money laundering. Link to read this news report: Click to go to http://www.hindustantimes.com/india/no-money-laundering-rbi-gives-clean-chit-to-icici-axis-hdfc/story-S4pU0xRMNiVvqQwZZVXKsL.html.

4. Whether these three Private Banks i.e. ICICI Bank, Axis Bank, HDFC Bank, committed any transaction errors between 24th Sept.2016 and 9th Nov. 2016?

5. Whether members of Central Board of Reserve Bank of India, have before approving the step of demonetization, perused the STOCK LEVELS OF RS. 100 DENOMINATION CURRENCY NOTES WITH CURRENCY CHEST BRANCHES OF BANKS, IN DIFFERENT STATES? WHETHER ANY STATE-WISE SUMMARY OF STOCKS OF RS. 100 CURRENCY NOTES WAS PREPARED? . Whether any member of Central Board expressed any dissatisfaction about stock levels of Rs. 100 denomination?

6. Whether converting India into Cash-less Economy has come up for discussion in the Central Board Meeting of RBI between 24th Sept. 2016 and 9th Nov. 2016?

7. Whether the issues of DIGITAL INDIA, POS Machines, Mobile Wallets, Rupay Cards, Visa and Master Cards, as principal tools of transactions as substitute for Currency has come for discussion in Central Board of RBI, between 24th Sept. 2016 and 9th Nov. 2016?

8. Whether RBI has on its own, or on advice from Government of India, examined between 24th Sept. 2016 and 8th Dec. 2016, a suggestion of import of currency notes to tide over currency crisis? When people die in queues, suffer heart attacks, and pregnant women deliver babies in Banks, weddings get stopped because Banks refuse to give money, people are unable to pay their hospital bills because they refuse old notes (eg. experience of Shri Sadananda Gowda, Union Minister in Karnataka), whether RBI still considers that there is no currency crisis and that there is no need to import currency notes?

9. Whether it has come to the notice of RBI that people are dying in Bank queues, that pregnant women are giving birth to babies in Bank queues, that at some places police are beating citizens in Bank queues harshly and rudely? Whether RBI knows that some Banks have placed on their notice boards that speaking rudely and harshly to Bank Employees is a crime punishable under Indian Penal Code? Why RBI could not issue a directive to Banks, to place another similar notice board which indicates that it will be a crime for Bank Staff to speak rudely and harshly to Citizens? There is a proverb in Telugu language. "Rendu cEtulu kalistE kAni cappaTlu koTTalEmu" (Unless both hands come together, claps cannot be made. This also applies to rude behaviors. Bank customers are not beggars. They have come to Bank to exchange their old currency notes because of an action initiated by the Government and RBI.

10. What value does RBI give to the concept of SANCTITY of a currency note being a DEMAND PROMISSORY NOTE PAYABLE TO BEARER, though the word "on demand" has subsequently been removed? The word "on demand" might have been removed some years back, because the powers-that-be of those days were afraid that they could not meet demand, when a real demand is made by public? The currency note is nearly an UNCONDITIONAL PROMISE TO PAY, though not ABSOLUTELY UNCONDITIONAL PROMISE. If the currency notes are going to be conditional, will it not be prudent for RBI to print the conditions on the REVERSE OF THE NOTES IN SMALL PRINT a la Insurance Policies, AirFreight Receipts? It may be a different thing that nobody may read them. The SMALL PRINT can also INCLUDE A CONDITION ABOUT THE LINK BETWEEN THE NOTE'S VALIDITY AND PAYMENT OF INCOME AND OTHER TAXES.

TAIL PIECE धूमकेतु తోకచుక్క

yb-donkey's suggestions: 1. RBI can examine introduction of Usance Promissory Notes, as now the sanctity of ON DEMAND is lost. 2. RBI can examine the introduction of HIGHER DENOMINATION CURRENCY PROMISSORY NOTES PAYABLE TO ORDER, WITH A NOT-NEGOTIABLE CROSSING, or an ACCOUNT-PAYEE CROSSING. The notes can have provision on REVERSE for endorsements of transferers and transferees, when they change hands.

To continue. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.

797 Water cannot become sacred water worthy of taking with reverance unless it passes through a conch

It is reported that Mr. Urjit Patel, one of the Dy. Governors of Reserve Bank of India, has been appointed as Governor of Reserve Bank of India, to succeed Mr. Raghuram Rajan, the outgoing Governor. It is good, that he is from within the RBI. Main advantage of having in-house upward movement is: the new incumbant will have an indepth knowledge of functioning of RBI. Besides, upward movement to Executives within Organisations will lift the morale of the Executives. If an outside person is thrust on Executives and Employees, morale will be to some extent affected, because choice of an outsider reflects a LACK OF CONFIDENCE on INSIDERS.

Appointing the Seniormost Dy. Governor, as RBI Governor, might have probably brought in greater transparency.

Mr. Urjit Patel, one gets an impression, seems to be a representative of Reliance in RBI, having worked as a Former Group President of RBI. This may be an imagination. Yet, there is an adage: "Justice should not only be done, but also appear to have been done".

There is a Telugu proverb: "SankhamlO pOstE kAni tIrtham kAdu". Approx. English equivalent: Water can become tIrtham (Sacred worshipped water, to be taken in with reverance in India), only when it passes through a conch, before the deity. We know who the deities are in Government of India. The Search Committee for appointing the RBI Governor 2016, is the Conch (Sankham).

To continue. सशेष. ఇంకా ఉంది.