Phone directory search knocks the bottom out of Maran's defence.

Image via Wikipedia

The article “Minister steals a telephone exchange, loots BSNL” (TNIE June 1, 2011) was entirely based on CBI’s secret report on Dayanidhi Maran’s home telephone exchange in every respect — except one. And that is, the figure of loss of Rs 440 crores in the article was estimated for the 323 stolen ISDN connections on the basis of the extent of use of phone no 24371515, given in the CBI report. So, the outburst of Maran against The New Indian Express group is amusing at best, and ridiculous at worst.

Why? One, he cannot deny that the CBI, which has reported on his wrong doings, is his own government’s agency. Two, the inquiry was instituted by the CBI acting suo motu; therefore it was no political hand moving against Maran in ‘wilderness’. Three, he has to answer his government’s CBI’s report instead of faulting The New Indian Express which did nothing other than making it public.

Maran’s claim to innocence rests on a letter (dated 6.4.2009) issued by V Meenalochiny, General Manager (OP) Chennai Telephones. This was in response to Maran’s letter sent couple of days before. The substance of the BSNL letter is this: One, “only one BSNL connection was provided” at his Boat Club residence to Maran when he was the Telecom Minister; two, that “only phone allotted was 24371500 ISDN-BRA” and “no other BSNL connection was provided” at Maran’s home till date; three, as an MP, Maran was allowed 4,50,000 call units on that number for three years but he had used just 1/3 of it. So far from pilfering billions of calls, Maran has not even used his quota of calls as an MP. Brandishing Meenalochiny’s letter, Maran asserted that TNIE story that 323 BSNL lines were installed in his home is false. Examine this claim now.

The CBI report gives the specific numbers of the 323 BSNL ISDN lines installed in Maran’s Boat Club home. But, Meenalochiny’s letter says only one line — bearing 24371500 — and no other, was installed in his home. If what she says is untrue, Maran’s defence collapses. Here is the evidence that clinches that Meenalochiny’s letter is incorrect. {Read on}