₹1.5 crore scam in CPI(M)-controlled Peravoor Cooperative Housing Society
After the ₹1.5 crore scam in the CPI(M)-controlled Peravoor Cooperative Housing Society has snowballed into a controversy, the party has clarified that they will not shrink away from its responsibility and will settle all the dues to be paid to investors.
CPI(M) Peravoor area committee secretary M. Rajan said the party would stand with the people and would not shrink away from the mistake caused by irresponsibilities of the governing administrative body and workers of the society.
He said the assets of the society would be sold and recovered from those concerned. The party was of the view that people should not lose their hard-earned money, Mr. Rajan told media.
Meanwhile, CPI(M) district secretary M.V. Jayarajan said the party was with those who had lost the money and would take action at the party organisational level against those involved in the irregularities.
He said the chit was started without the permission of the Cooperation Department. The district committee comprising P. Jayarajan had banned the operation of chit fund. Mr. Jayarajan demanded that the Cooperation Department should conduct a thorough inquiry into the alleged misappropriation of the chit amount.
The issue came to fore following the allegation raised by the investors, who alleged that the society swindled the money after they started a chit of ₹1 lakh in 2017. About 876 people had joined the chit fund. Though many received the money, about 315 people did not get the money despite several requests.
The CPI(M) issued a statement following the allegation raised by P.V. Haridas, secretary of the society. Mr. Haridas in an interview had said the chit was started with the permission and knowledge of the party and CPI(M) leader P. Jayarajan.
However, Mr. Jayarajan denied the allegations and threatened to take legal action against Mr. Haridas for making the unsubstantiated allegations. Following this, Mr. Haridas retracted from his earlier statement. He said the reference was based on hearsay and that he was correcting what he had said earlier.
Source: Read Full Article