Placing two ‘Samdhis’ on the top decision-making positions in SAIL/CMO is not only a matter of “Conflict of Interest” but also unethical and against Good Corporate Governance.

Sanjay Agarwal, while on the post of CGM (Flat Products)/HQ, was directly reporting to ED (Sales & ITD) his ‘Samdhi’ Mahesh Chand Agarwal

Sanjay Agarwal, while on the post of CGM (Marketing)/HQ, was directly reporting to his ‘Samdhi’ Mahesh Chand Agarwal when he was also holding charge of ED (Marketing)/HQ

Sanjay Agarwal and Mahesh Chand Agarwal, while respectively on the post of CGM (Marketing)/ED (Marketing) and ED (Sales & ITD)/ED (Marketing), were jointly responsible for deciding/fixing the selling prices for steel products.

Vide circular No. PER/CCS/426/2018 dated 15th December, 2018, following the recommendation of BCG who was engaged for the turnaround of SAIL by paying a hefty sum of over ₹ 84 Crores, SAIL/CMO was split into three verticals namely Sales, Marketing and Marketing Services each headed by an Executive Director.

Vide circular No.PL/OO/81/2018 Dated 24.12.2018, the Roles and Responsibilities were fixed for the above three Executive Directors. Two key Responsibilities which were rested with the Marketing department are as under:

1.    Drive the product level marketing, “pricing” and distribution strategy and the market segmentation, targeting and positioning of various products.

2.    Overall responsibility for ensuring product level profitability for each plant

The idea was borrowed from other similar industries with a view that pricing must not be left with the sales team as they have the tendency of unnecessarily reducing the operating prices to achieve the monthly sales targets, thus suppressing the market prices resulting in perpetual reduction in prices. Marketing department was placed to strike the balance between the targets assigned to the sales team and the operating prices.

The entire idea of striking the balance was negated by the SAIL management by posting two “smadhis” together. It has been gathered that after a long-standing affair, daughter of Sanjay Agarwal tied the nuptial knot with son of Mahesh Chand Agarwal in the last week of Nov 2022.

Was it a fixed match? Code of Conduct dumped Conflict of Interest pumped

During the period when Mahesh Chand Agarwal was ED (Sales & ITD)/ED (Marketing), Soma Mondal, V S Chakravarty and Amarendu Praksh were at the helm of affairs deciding the postings for the officers of SAIL/CMO. It is noteworthy that there is no policy or guideline in place for transfers and postings in SAIL. They are the purely based on the whims and fancies of the Director (Commercial) and Chairman.

To avoid such conflict of interest there are guidelines in place not to post husband and wife in the reporting relationship with each other. Some state governments like Maharashtra, vide their circular dated July 12, 2020 directed the government departments in the state that no husband, wife or any other close relative should be posted in the same department. Whether there is a guideline in writing exists or not, it is immaterial. It is a more of a common sense if you want to run your organisation/institution

Questions arise why SAIL management did not take due care in posting two “Samdhis” Mahesh Chand Agarwal and Sanjay Agarwal on such posts that if they form a team, the same could be highly detrimental for SAIL’s interest. Readers can see the proof of the same in the figures given below and decide on their own.

Around Aug 2024, Sanjay Agarwal was finally shifted from Central Marketing Organisation (CMO) to Coal Import Group at Corporate Office to make way for Abhijeet Kumar for the post of Executive Director (Marketing).  It is noteworthy that pending CBI/LOKPAL investigations, Abhijeet was brough back from suspension on Jun 28, 2024 and promoted to Executive Director (Marketing).

The relationship-cum-nexus not only damaged SAIL but also used to take revenge on the Whistle Blower

Sanjay left Sanjay behind: SAIL’s Sanjay reminds us of Mahabharata’s Sanjay, who while sitting in Hastinapur narrated the entire battle through live commentary to the blind king Dhritarashtra, fought between Kauravas and Pandavas at Kurukshetra, a place about 150 KM away from Hastinapur. SAIL’s Sanjay also used his farsightedness and foresightedness first to label Bhatia’s complaints as insinuations, lacking evidence, imaginary, malicious, vexatious, and frivolous without conducting any investigation in his complaints and then punishing him for the same even though CVO and Ministry of Steel had recommended CBI inquiry in the complaints.

Whistle Blower Rajeev Bhatia on Nov 17, 2022 sent detailed corruption complaints through his email-id know.ur.officers@gmail.com to the then Chairman Soma Mondal and Director (Commercial) V S Chakravarty. Rather than ordering investigation in the complaints, the same complaints were first forming the basis of Bhatia’s suspension on Nov 24, 2022 and subsequently issuing him two fake, fictitious and imaginary chargesheets. Apart from taking revenge on Bhatia the other aim of his suspension was to continue sales to FAKE PROJECTS.

https://www.bureaugram.com/news/suspension-of-the-whistle-blower-a-weapon-to-accelerate-intensify-corruption

First, he was charged with a charge that the email-id know.ur.officers@gmail.com does not belong to Bhatia and then with a charge that the allegations levelled by him in the complaints are insinuations and lack evidence. They are found to be imaginary, malicious, vexatious, and frivolous. It is noteworthy here that the above charge was framed against Bhatia without conducting any investigation whatsoever in the complaints sent by him to Soma and Chakravarty.

Despite the fact that the names of both the “Samdhis” were appearing in the corruption complaints, V S Chakravarthy made Sanjay Agarwal the Disciplinary Authority in the false Disciplinary Proceedings initiated against Bhatia to take revenge on him for exposing the corruption.

Matter was not limited to framing of the charges. Sanjay appointed Munish Ahuja as the Inquiry Officer, knowing fully well that Ahuja is one of the key players in the sale of steel to Venkatesh Infra Projects P Ltd, a firm covered by Bhatia in his complaints sent by him to Soma and Chakravarty.

.

Ahuja proved to another Sanjay who also used his divine power to prove that the Bhatia’s complaints as insinuations, lacking evidence, imaginary, malicious, vexatious, and frivolous, without conducting any investigations either himself or inquiring from CVO-SAIL to whom LOKPAL, through CVC, had given the task of investigations in the complaints of the Whistle Blower Rajeev Bhatia.

Based on the investigation report submitted by CVO SAIL, vide letter No. 1(7)2023-V&R dated July 28, 2023, Ministry of steel recommended for CBI inquiry into complaint No 73 and 74 of LOKPAL pertaining to steel supplies to Venkatesh Infra Projects P Ltd and Avon Steel Industries P Ltd. The relevant portions of the above letter are reproduced below.

 While recommending CBI inquiry, the Ministry also advised SAIL to initiate Regular Departmental Action against M C Agrawal, the then ED (Sales & ITD) of SAIL.

While pronouncing the punishment to Bhatia on Sep 28, 2023 for the charge that his complaints are insinuations, lacking evidence, imaginary, malicious, vexatious, and frivolous, Sanjay was well aware that Bhatia’s complaints have been found substantive and CBI investigations have been recommended by the Ministry in the complaints. But owing to “Conflict of Interest” for being “smadhi” of M C Agrawal, he inflicted severe punishment on Bhatia, which was later formed the basis for unlawfully invoking Rule 56(j) to give premature retirement to Bhatia.

Also read

https://www.bureaugram.com/news/sail-ed-sanjay-agrawal-an-undisciplined-disciplinary-authority

https://www.bureaugram.com/news/anerandu-prakash-cmd-sail-spurges-public-money-once-again-to-support-the-corrupt

(The above article has been written based on Bureaugram’s extensive research and inputs from various sources including sources from SAIL)