De­spite ag­gres­sive at­tempts by DS­GMC Pres­i­dent and for­mer BJP Delhi leg­is­la­tor Man­jin­der Singh Sirsa to gen­er­ate good­will for him­self dur­ing the lock­down pe­ri­ods on the ba­sis of the lan­gar ser­vice of Sikhs in Delhi, DS­GMC has been un­der fire for mis­use of funds and un­eth­i­cal deeds in vi­o­la­tion of the teach­ings of the Gu­rus. The gross mis­use of Gur­d­wara money for show­er­ing gifts to BJP lead­ers re­quires le­gal, so­cial and San­gat’s au­dit of all those lead­ers, of­fi­cials and em­ploy­ees in­volved in this, says DS­GMC elec­tions ac­tivist and WSN colum­nist Gurmeet Singh.

SINCE THE LAST ONE YEAR, DS­GMC HAS BEEN IN THE NEWS FOR FI­NAN­CIAL FRAUDS AND BUNGLING which have un­for­tu­nately not been prop­erly in­ves­ti­gated and au­dited re­sult­ing in more au­dac­ity to com­mit such crimes of mis­use of San­gat money. The re­cent case in which a Delhi court has or­dered reg­is­tra­tion of FIR against Man­jin­der Singh Sirsa and oth­ers for fi­nan­cial mis­ap­pro­pri­a­tion is only the tip of the ice­berg.

The pub­lic fund of the San­gat re­ceived as of­fer­ings and do­na­tions are meant to be used for up­keep, main­te­nance and ren­o­va­tion of his­tor­i­cal Gur­d­waras and other ex­penses per­mis­si­ble un­der the Delhi Sikh Gur­d­waras Act 1971.

Sec­tion 24 of the Delhi Sikh Gur­d­wara Act cat­e­gor­i­cally states that no gift can be given to any­one out of the do­na­tions re­ceived. In this par­tic­u­lar case, Sec­tion 26 and 36 have been vi­o­lated as well. Sec­tion 36 deems every elected mem­ber of the DS­GMC to be a pub­lic ser­vant and hence has to dis­charge his du­ties ac­cord­ingly.

Sec­tion 24 of the Delhi Sikh Gur­d­wara Act cat­e­gor­i­cally states that no gift can be given to any­one out of the do­na­tions re­ceived. 

In the 66/​2019 case be­fore the ACMM Delhi, false trans­ac­tions were shown with­out any goods or ser­vices of­fered to DS­GMC. As men­tioned in the court or­der, some of the en­ti­ties were dummy and did not ex­ist in the real world, like Ris­ing Ball Wed­ding and Event Plan­ner, Raja Tent and Dec­o­ra­tors and Harsh Op­ti­cals. Fake bills were made in the names of these en­ti­ties. Bills were raised on let­ter­heads and no proper bills were fur­nished with­out the sig­na­tures of the per­son who has pre­pared it.

While all of this is still to be proved in the court, prima fa­cie, the charges are alarm­ing and will cause deep con­ster­na­tion in the minds of the de­vout San­gat, not just in Delhi but across the world.

There should be an im­me­di­ate call from the res­ig­na­tion of DS­GMC Pres­i­dent Man­jin­der Singh Sirsa on moral grounds.

How can such a huge amount of San­gat money get sanc­tioned with­out sig­na­tures and with­out bills? What is the process? Does the tril­lion ru­pee bud­get or­ga­ni­za­tion have any sense of get­ting a Stan­dard Op­er­at­ing Pro­ce­dure -SOP, in place?

When lead­ers like Man­jin­der Singh Sirsa spew venom against Pak­istan or in­dulge in ex­pand­ing their so­cial me­dia base to show a rise in pop­u­lar­ity at DS­GMC ex­pense and to gain brownie points for al­lies like the BJP, it hurts the soul of the San­gat.

How can such a huge amount of San­gat money get sanc­tioned with­out sig­na­tures and with­out bills? What is the process? Does the tril­lion ru­pee bud­get or­ga­ni­za­tion have any sense of get­ting a Stan­dard Op­er­at­ing Pro­ce­dure -SOP, in place?

Who can dis­count the role of then DS­GMC Pres­i­dent Man­jit Singh GK and the en­tire ex­ec­u­tive in this par­tic­u­lar case? Not only that, what was the role of the other op­po­si­tion mem­ber? Why is there no in­ter­nal mech­a­nism to nip this evil in the bud and not for an elec­tion year to bring it up?

When it comes to us­ing of Gur­d­wara funds, every sin­gle mem­ber, ir­re­spec­tive of af­fil­i­a­tion must raise his or her voice at a wrong-do­ing as soon as he learns about it. In fact, every mem­ber should be proac­tive to keep a tab on such de­vel­op­ments.

DS­GMC mem­ber­ship is not or­di­nary mem­ber­ship of a so­cial or po­lit­i­cal or­gan­i­sa­tion. Mem­bers are rep­re­sen­ta­tives for pro­jec­tion and pro­tec­tion of the in­ter­ests of the com­mu­nity, pro­tec­tion of re­li­gious tra­di­tions and a watch­dog over the con­tri­bu­tions of the Sikh San­gat.

DS­GMC mem­ber­ship is not or­di­nary mem­ber­ship of a so­cial or po­lit­i­cal or­gan­i­sa­tion. Mem­bers are rep­re­sen­ta­tives for pro­jec­tion and pro­tec­tion of the in­ter­ests of the com­mu­nity, pro­tec­tion of re­li­gious tra­di­tions and a watch­dog over the con­tri­bu­tions of the Sikh San­gat.

Whether it is proved in the courts or not, how can Man­jin­der Singh Sirsa, Man­jit Singh GK, Harmeet Singh Kalka and the en­tire Badal group ex­plain giv­ing ex­pen­sive gifts to their nears and dears and spon­sor­ing BJP events on the sly? This is im­moral, un­eth­i­cal and down­right loot of Gur­d­wara funds. All such mem­bers who were privy to this, be­fore the com­mit­ting of this crime or af­ter, should stay away from Gur­d­wara af­fairs.

The DS­GMC elec­tion process has be­gun and elec­tions are likely early next year. It is high time for the San­gat of Delhi to ques­tion all these 51 mem­bers about what they were do­ing when they were in power. If this is not done, this rut would con­tinue and per­haps ac­cel­er­ate and mul­ti­ply in the times to come.

Un­less there is a sea-change in the ways the Delhi Sikh San­gat par­tic­i­pates and ques­tions the bonafide and role of DS­GMC mem­bers, change is un­likely. It should be­gin with a call for the im­me­di­ate res­ig­na­tion of DS­GMC Pres­i­dent Man­jin­der Singh Sirsa on moral grounds.