RTI Happenings: The hoax called VIP and VVIP

[karira]

As reported by Veeresh Malik in moneylife.in on 11 June 2012:
The hoax called VIP and VVIP - Moneylife Personal Finance site and magazine

The hoax called VIP and VVIP

Is there a written definition of who is a VIP or VVIP? Stunningly, no. and yet, thousands of people are using these labels to avoid tolls and taxes and freeload in many other ways

It is blatantly clear that all sorts of expenses are booked on the names of VIPs and VVIPs, facilities provided, exemptions, causing loss to the exchequer delivered and of course, there is no end to the amount of inconvenience caused to the people of India. Now we even have VIP status for cremation grounds and toilets.

I recently discovered that there were only 13 berths (in a coach of 46 berths); none of them lower berths, when trying to do some 120-day advance bookings by 2AC from Delhi to Goa on the Goa SK Express. The rest of the berths, all 33 of them, were routinely blocked for “VIPs’ and their assorted quotas. This got me started again and so I sent the Railway Board a fairly detailed RTI application asking for more information on this whole VIP and quota thing.

Much of this loot would be reduced if misuse of official position by VIPs came down. But what is the definition of VIP in India? The question is fascinating because there is a direct co-relation between misuse of official position by VIPs and the rampant loot that has become the bane of our existence in India.

I have filed RTI applications, sent queries and written articles but till today, have never got anything close to a cogent definition of the term even though my questions have been directed at Rashtrapati Bhavan and going through PMO, ministry of home affairs, ministry of external affairs, ministry of civil aviation, ministry of surface transport and ministry of railways, and a few other government bodies which use or used the term ‘VIPs’.

I have received long-winded responses, and even been told privately that the term ‘VIP’ might soon be replaced by something else, to cover those who require security. In actual fact, however, the tribe of VIPs who are freeloaders has only grown exponentially, and nowhere is this visible more than when you travel by any means of transport.

A copy of the response, with the questions next to it, is provided with this article. To be fair, the ministry of railways has been more than helpful with the information provided. Here is what I found:
There is no definition for the term VIP, and apart from the usual lot, pretty much anybody who holds a requisition from a “High Official” (yet another undefined term) qualifies to be one as far as out-of-turn allotment of reservations is concerned. That letterheads of these VIPs are regularly misused for reservations under emergency quota is a known practice, and is also reported on in the media from time to time.

These quotas for VIPs and “emergency quotas” are based on something undefined called a “well-established practice”. When I asked further on a private basis, I was told that this “well-established practice” has been followed since well before independence and was meant more to ensure reservations for our long departed colonial rulers—who could throw a native out if they so desired. Of course, it makes no difference to current rulers that Mahatma Gandhi had fought for our independence from just this kind of “well-established practice” in Natal, South Africa and then in India.

Further, within the VIPs and for other finer points like lower berths and blocking of 1AC coupes/cabins, as well as to justify expenses and losses, the RTI response quotes something called the “Warrant of Precedence” as the legitimate document prescribed. However, a closer look at the “Warrant of Precedence” reveals that note number 1 clearly states: “The order in this Table of Precedence is meant for state and ceremonial occasions and has no application in the day-to-day business of the government.

http://164.100.47.132/LssNew/instruction/precedence.pdf

The ministry of home affairs’ directions contained in Letter No 12/11/99-Pub II dated 26 December 1966, the validity of which has been confirmed by Letter No 12/1/2007-Public dated 14 August 2007. The MHA has confirmed in 2007 that the Old Warrant of Precedence shall be taken as a guide only to determine ranks.

Now this “Warrant of Precedence” is also quoted as the document by which VIPs are exempted from paying tolls. It has also been claimed that the “Warrant of Precedence” is the document by which these self-same VIPs claim exemption from traffic laws. The list goes on. But as stated before, the big issue here is this: the Warrant of Precedence doesn’t apply in matters of governance, as per the instructions of the President of India, in the circular referred to above. So, is the complete institution of VIPs in India totally illegal and unwarranted? Well, the loot and scoot and scams certainly are.

(Veeresh Malik had a long career in the Merchant Navy, which he left in 1983. He has qualifications in ship-broking and chartering, loves to travel, and has been in print and electronic media for over two decades. After starting and selling a couple of companies, is now back to his first love-writing.)

[drprasan]

Sponsorer

very interesting. I too used to wonder about this abuse in the name of VIPs etc

[ambrish.p]

Beside this what they consider is (point no.48, para no. 128 and page no.175): http://darpg.nic.in/darpgwebsite_cms...file/CSMOP.pdf

regards

[karira]

Beside this what they consider is (point no.48, para no. 128 and page no.175): http://darpg.nic.in/darpgwebsite_cms...file/CSMOP.pdf

Ambrish,

That list and also all such other lists are ONLY for diplomatic and ceremonial occasions.
They are not for (or applicable to) situations involving Government business/services !

[ambrish.p]

Ambrish,

That list and also all such other lists are ONLY for diplomatic and ceremonial occasions.
They are not for (or applicable to) situations involving Government business/services !

Dear Karira Sir,

Ministry of Finance has INFORMED me in writing that this two docs are taken into record while making decision.

regards