With Reference to The News Report Dated 23 March 2025 on Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM) -
Entitled as - “Government Forms House Committee to Probe Jal Jeevan Mission Bunglings, Echoing Whistleblower IAS Officer’s Allegations”
This clarification and rebuttal are issued pursuant to the proceedings before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Suit No. CS (OS) 859/2025, in compliance with the statement made by Daily Headlines Today on 3rd February 2026, undertaking to publish the version of the plaintiff to ensure fairness, balance, and transparency in reporting.
Status of website of daily English newspaper 'Headlines Today'
It is reiterated, for the sake of abundant clarity, that Headlines Today was neither the author nor the originator of the news report titled “Government Forms House Committee to Probe Jal Jeevan Mission Bunglings, Echoing Whistleblower IAS Officer’s Allegations”, published on its website on 23rd March 2025.
The said report was sourced verbatim from the syndicated news feed of Kashmir News Trust (KNT), a Srinagar-based news agency, and republished strictly in the routine course of news dissemination, without any editorial intervention, modification, reinterpretation, or independent amplification, including in the headline.
The report had already been circulated widely in the public domain across multiple digital platforms before its republication by Daily Headlines Today website.
Further It was not carried in the print edition, nor was any follow-up or supplementary reporting undertaken by this publication either before or after the said date.
As a responsible media organisation, Headlines Today affirms its commitment to fair reportage, balanced presentation, and adherence to journalistic ethics, and therefore publishes the present rebuttal from the plaintiff i.e Mr Arun Kumar Mehta in full detail as received for public interest.
INTRODUCTION
This rebuttal received from the plaintiff i.e Mr Arun Kumar Mehta is issued to place on record the factual, procedural, and institutional clarifications concerning the allegations referenced in the report dated 23 March 2025.
The said report, sourced from KNT, was apparently and substantially based on a letter authored by Mr Ashok Parmar, defendant No. 1 in the above-mentioned suit, and carried assertions regarding alleged irregularities in the implementation of the Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM) in Jammu & Kashmir. It also described Mr Parmar as a “whistleblower” and suggested the existence of “bunglings” and a “scam.”
The present clarification is confined strictly to placing verifiable records, statutory processes, governance architecture, and procedural realities on record, to correct impressions that may have been formed in the absence of complete contextual material.
GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK OF JJM: STRUCTURAL IMPOSSIBILITY OF THE ALLEGED SCAM
The Jal Jeevan Mission operates through a highly digitised, multilayered institutional architecture designed to ensure financial discipline, administrative transparency, and physical verification. The governance framework includes:
Mandatory Administrative Approval (AA) and Technical Sanction (TS) e-Tendering through a centralised digital procurement platform
Online bill processing and fund disbursement exclusively through PaySys, generating a complete digital audit trail
Geo-tagged photographic documentation of work execution
Multi-tier physical verification mechanisms
Village-level monitoring through Pani Samitis
District and UT-level oversight
Real-time reporting on the Government of India’s JJM MIS/IMIS portal
RTI disclosures and official records confirm that none of these institutional safeguards was breached, and inquiries conducted by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) did not establish any prosecutable irregularity.
MISREPRESENTATION OF FINANCIAL AND PHYSICAL PROGRESS
The allegations question how approximately ₹3,592 crore (around 25% of the total approved project cost) could correspond to nearly 74.53% physical coverage.
This argument omits a fundamental baseline: approximately 31% of households in Jammu & Kashmir already had functional tap connections before the commencement of JJM. Consequently, the actual incremental coverage achieved was approximately 44%, not 74%.
Higher physical progress at lower initial financial expenditure is a recognised and desirable implementation outcome, especially in infrastructure projects where physical execution precedes billing. To portray this as a financial irregularity reflects a misinterpretation of standard project execution methodology.
IMPLEMENTATION PERFORMANCE RECORD
Official JJM MIS/IMIS data indicate that project progress during the tenure of Mr Parmar himself was comparatively the weakest, even lower than during the COVID-19 disruption period. Substantial acceleration occurred thereafter, with nearly 75% universal tap water coverage achieved before the retirement of Dr A.K. Mehta.
Subsequent deceleration in progress and the policy extension of project timelines up to 2028 are matters of administrative decision-making unrelated to the period under consideration.
ROLE OF THE CHIEF SECRETARY: INSTITUTIONAL CLARIFICATION
The Chief Secretary does not exercise operational or contractual control over procurement or execution processes under JJM.
The implementation structure functions under:
Mission Director,
Principal Secretary, Jal Shakti Department
Advisor to the Hon’ble Lieutenant Governor
At least three distinct functional layers separate the Chief Secretary from contract management or financial disbursement. No documentary evidence exists indicating any procurement deviation, procedural instruction, or contractual interference attributable to the Chief Secretary.
MISCHARACTERISATION OF “WHISTLEBLOWER” STATUS
"The repeated description of Mr Parmar as a “whistleblower” suffers from material inaccuracies:
Absence of new, verifiable disclosures" Mr Arun Kumar added
Reiteration of previously examined allegations does not constitute whistleblowing.
Non-substantiation by statutory authorities :
Complaints addressed to the CVC, CBI, ACB, and NCSC were not taken cognisance of by any of the entities, a fact of material significance, since it indicates that his complaints failed to meet even the basic threshold of scrutiny.
Lack of plausibility verification:
Wide-ranging allegations, involving figures from ₹1,000 to ₹14,000 crore, were reproduced without forensic scrutiny, documentary corroboration, or institutional confirmation.
"Whistleblower protection presupposes verifiable disclosures of wrongdoing. Mere repetition of unsubstantiated assertions does not fulfil that standard".
Mr Kumar clarifies further
PROCUREMENT PROCEDURE AND TECHNICAL SANCTION:
FACTUAL POSITION
The assertion that Technical Sanction must precede Administrative Approval is contrary to established government financial protocols and General Financial Rules (GFRs). The accepted practice mandates AA as the foundational administrative approval, followed by TS.
Any contrary interpretation reflects procedural misunderstanding rather than institutional violation.
INSTITUTIONAL PROCEEDINGS AND SELECTIVE PRESENTATION
The report selectively highlights Mr Parmar’s approach to the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) without adequately reflecting the Commission’s findings, which did not substantiate the allegations.
Additionally, references to internal departmental meetings were selectively portrayed, omitting procedural context and administrative explanations, thereby creating a distorted narrative of institutional victimisation.
PREJUDICIAL FRAMING OF LEGISLATIVE INQUIRY
The conclusion of the report questioned whether the House Committee inquiry would deliver justice or merely serve political ends. Such framing, before any findings, prejudges the outcome of a constitutional process, undermining both the presumption of institutional impartiality and due process.
CONCLUSION
The institutional record does not support allegations of systemic financial irregularity or administrative misconduct in the implementation of the Jal Jeevan Mission in Jammu & Kashmir.
The governance reforms introduced during the relevant period emphasised digital transparency, procedural accountability, and audit traceability, contributing to Jammu & Kashmir’s first rank in the National e-Service Delivery Assessment (NeSDA) 2023, a publicly verifiable achievement.
Headlines Today, while reiterating that it merely republishes syndicated content, remains committed to fair reporting, institutional balance, and judicial propriety, and publishes this rebuttal strictly in adherence to the directions of the Hon’ble Court and the principles of responsible journalism.
.... From Editor's Desk
Comment List