Desi Cartman Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 NEW DELHI: Even before the dust settled on the controversy involving Satyam's debarment, the World Bank on Monday revealed that action has been taken against a total of five entities in India, including Wipro Technologies, and an individual. ( Watch ) The action was initiated against these entities and individual as they were found to have "violated the fraud and corruption provisions of the Procurement Guidelines or the Consultant Guidelines," besides offering improper benefits to Bank staff. Megasoft became the third Indian software vendor to have attracted the Bank's ire, while Nestor Pharmaceuticals and Gap International were non-IT entities. An individual Surendra Singh was barred from doing business with the Bank for violating guidelines. While Wipro was barred for four years beginning June 2007 for "providing improper benefits to Bank staff", Megasoft barred for an identical period beginning December 2007 for "participating in a joint venture with Bank staff while also conducting business with the Bank." In a statement late last night, the World Bank said that it decided to "make public the names of all the companies that have been debarred from receiving direct contracts from the Bank group under its corporate procurement programme. "This change was made in the interest of fairness and transparency... From now on the Bank group would publicly list names of companies debarred from its corporate procurement." Commenting on the World Bank action, Wipro said in a statement this morning: "Our inability to get future business from World Bank will not adversely affect our business and results of operations." Megasoft officials too said that the debarment will not have no revenue implication for the company. Earlier, Satyam, which was debarred for eight years beginning September 2008, had demanded an apology for making public its name and withdrawal of what it called "inappropriate" statement by the Bank. The Bank had refused to apologise. In the list of "ineligible" firms released by the Bank, over a 100 companies or individuals - some of the Indian-origin - have been barred temporarily or life. The list includes Gurpreet Singh Malik, Vikram Deepak Gursahaney, Kamal Sharda and Sharda Impex (UK Ltd) in Nigeria, as well as Labh Singh Gill, Labh Universal, Pradeep Menon, Shivshanker Pre Nair and Pradeep S Nair in the UK and Mandeep S Sandhu in the US. All these entities are permanently barred. In 2000, in connection with its IPO of American Depository Shares (ADS) in the United States, Wipro offered a commonly utilised and SEC-approved Directed Share Program (DSP), which allowed employees and clients to purchase ADSs at the IPO price. The programme's object was to involve employees and customers with the public offering to expand the recognition and brand. A majority of the shares sold under the DSP were allotted to Wipro employees. Pursuant to this, Wipro representatives offered the World Bank, through its Chief Information Officer (CIO) and senior staff, participation in the program, Wipro said in statement. All participants in the programme signed a conflict-of- interest statement, saying that their purchase did not violate any ethics or policies of their company. However, the World Bank had determined in June 2007 the company would be ineligible for the international lender's direct contracts up to 2011, citing a conflict of interest policy. :orderorder::orderorder::orderorder::orderorder:
gs Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Serious rap on the knuckles for India Inc. Cant help get a feeling that these companies have been running their business like the filthy way they deal with the sarkaari offices in India.
Desi Cartman Posted January 12, 2009 Author Posted January 12, 2009 Serious rap on the knuckles for India Inc. Cant help get a feeling that these companies have been running their business like the filthy way they deal with the sarkaari offices in India. exactly ... no professionalism :((
jf1gp_1 Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 exactly ... no professionalism :(( read the whole thing again Directed Share Program is SEC-approved there was nothing illegal
Desi Cartman Posted January 12, 2009 Author Posted January 12, 2009 read the whole thing again Directed Share Program is SEC-approved there was nothing illegal While Wipro was barred for four years beginning June 2007 for "providing improper benefits to Bank staff", Megasoft barred for an identical period beginning December 2007 for "participating in a joint venture with Bank staff while also conducting business with the Bank." The action was initiated against these entities and individual as they were found to have "violated the fraud and corruption provisions of the Procurement Guidelines or the Consultant Guidelines," besides offering improper benefits to Bank staff.
jf1gp_1 Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 While Wipro was barred for four years beginning June 2007 for "providing improper benefits to Bank staff"' date= Megasoft barred for an identical period beginning December 2007 for "participating in a joint venture with Bank staff while also conducting business with the Bank." The action was initiated against these entities and individual as they were found to have "violated the fraud and corruption provisions of the Procurement Guidelines or the Consultant Guidelines," besides offering improper benefits to Bank staff. and how do you know the demands were not made by world bank ppl ? 3 companies barred from same organization instead of pointing fingers at Indian companies why not question why only world bank ? You honestly believe an Indian company would offers so called "improper benefits" without any initiation from Idiots on the other side ?
Desi Cartman Posted January 13, 2009 Author Posted January 13, 2009 and how do you know the demands were not made by world bank ppl ? 3 companies barred from same organization instead of pointing fingers at Indian companies why not question why only world bank ? You honestly believe an Indian company would offers so called "improper benefits" without any initiation from Idiots on the other side ? you have a point there but there is something wrong with our companies as well .. why couldnt they complain about it ?
jf1gp_1 Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 you have a point there but there is something wrong with our companies as well .. why couldnt they complain about it ? i am going to assume you have never fought for an account
beetle Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 and how do you know the demands were not made by world bank ppl ? 3 companies barred from same organization instead of pointing fingers at Indian companies why not question why only world bank ? You honestly believe an Indian company would offers so called "improper benefits" without any initiation from Idiots on the other side ? Agree... I would rather believe Azim Premji rather than the WB.Unless they have concrete proof...they have no business giving people a bad name. They act like they have only angels working for them.
Tapioca Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 You honestly believe an Indian company would offers so called "improper benefits" without any initiation from Idiots on the other side ? I do. I won't be surprised if it often happens that way.
Guest dada_rocks Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 Sounds like zealotry against indian companies.. World bank should ban itself from running.
Tapioca Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 Sounds like zealotry against indian companies.. World bank should ban itself from running. World bank today awarded Satyam's contract to TCS.
beetle Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 Wipro did nothing wrong: Premji to employees Press Trust of India Tuesday, January 13, 2009 (New Delhi) Hours after World bank made public that Wipro has been debarred from doing any business with the global lender, the company's Chairman Azim Premji wrote to its over 1,00,000 employees saying that the company had not done anything unethical. Denying charges levelled by the World Bank that Wipro provided improper benefits to the bank staff, Premji said, "Let me reaffirm that Wipro was right from a legal as well as ethical standpoint. We believe what we did what was right and we did it in the right manner." The company, in 2000, had provided Bank staff option to purchase its American Depository Shares at IPO price through a Directed Share Programme. However, the Bank in June 2007 determined that this was a conflict of interest. In an internal communication to the company's employees, Premji said, "We have always prided ourselves for setting the highest standards of business ethics in our dealings with all our stakeholders. We have built a strong culture which upholds compliance in letter and spirit. The approach was no different in this instance also." The World Bank deemed the IT firm ineligible to bid for direct contracts from it for the period 2007-2011. The Bank also named other companies that were barred from doing business it in a list made public on Monday. Premji further explained that all participants in the Direct Share Programme signed a conflict of interest statement that their purchase did not violate any ethics or conflict of interest policies of their company. Though the company maintained yesterday that the announcement will not have any impact on its revenues, its stock took a beating at the BSE yesterday. It, however, was trading 4.5 per cent up at Rs 237.6 on the BSE on Tuesday. http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/default.aspx
beetle Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 World bank today awarded Satyam's contract to TCS. It is a good that it stays with an Indian company.Keeps one rotten apple from spoiling it for the rest.
Lurker Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 You honestly believe an Indian company would offers so called "improper benefits" without any initiation from Idiots on the other side ? Yes I do. Been there seen that. Just to give one quick example(which may/may not be applicable in this case). TCS used to take (I left in 2001) loads of sub-standard IT folks from third tier companies. These folks would then be charged clients at rate ranging from 80-120$ and would be paid a paltry fraction. This was of course not a secret and many a client would challenge the resident PMs(everyone is a freaking PM in an Indian company) and suitable palms were greased accordingly. One can argue many American companies do that too. I will agree to that. In my current assignment an American company is doing exactly that. Charge clients 80$/hr, pass 65$/hr to the Indian company and give a percentage to their "inside" contact who makes sure this company gets its consultants on board. Now if I had to take action I will surely pick the bad apples in my own company. But I will also fire the consulting company that paid bribes to get their consultant on site. xxx
Recommended Posts