SAIL Under a Shadow: When Vigilance Becomes a Formality – Ex-SAIL Official Flags Serious Ethical Lapses, Governance Concerns at Steel Maharatna PSU
The recent developments within the Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) have, without an iota of doubt, severely dented the public image of the Maharatna steel PSU
www.indianpsu.com has been approached by Mr. Bibhuti Narayan Majhi, former General Manager (Corporate Vigilance), Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) from 2012 to 2016, with an article authored by him that raises serious questions over the vigilance mechanism within the Maharatna PSU. As a responsible and neutral media platform, we are publishing the article in its entirety, exactly as received from Mr. Majhi, in the interest of transparency and public discourse.
Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs) were not established merely to conduct business. They were envisioned as institutions of public trust—anchored in integrity, transparency, and accountability. The Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), a Maharatna enterprise, has long symbolized these ideals. However, recent developments compel us to confront a difficult
question: Is this an isolated controversy, or does it reflect a deeper erosion of governance?
When Standards Begin to Slip
The appointment of a senior official to a key position, despite unresolved scrutiny, has understandably raised concern. This is not about presuming guilt. It is about preserving the standards expected in public life. Vigilance clearance has never been a mere procedural requirement—it is a declaration of credibility. It reassures stakeholders that those entrusted with authority stand above reasonable doubt. When such clearance is granted despite lingering questions, its very purpose is diluted. A vigilance system that cannot pre-empt doubt risks becoming symbolic rather than substantive.
A Pattern That Cannot Be Ignored
Information available in the public domain suggests that steel meant for genuine projects—offered at concessional rates—was allegedly diverted to questionable entities and eventually into the open market. If true, this is not a routine irregularity but an indication of systemic weakness. The implications are serious:
Genuine stakeholders are sidelined
Artificial or dubious entities exploit institutional mechanisms
Fair pricing and allocation lose credibility
When the scale of such occurrences appears significant, it raises concern not merely about individual lapses, but about structural vulnerabilities. When Ability Is Misused A more subtle and perhaps more troubling issue lies in the misuse of competence itself. Officers with deep knowledge of systems and procedures may sometimes use that very expertise to navigate, and even manipulate, institutional frameworks—without overtly violating rules. In such cases, procedures are followed in form, but their spirit is compromised. Efficiency, when divorced from integrity, can become an instrument of distortion.
Individuals who can “deliver results” within flexible interpretations of rules often rise quickly—sometimes not because they strengthen the institution, but because they adapt to its weaknesses. This creates a culture where outcomes overshadow principles—a dangerous shift for any public institution.
The Whistleblower Question
Equally disquieting is the reported treatment of the whistleblower who brought these concerns to light. His actions led to scrutiny by institutions such as the Lokpal and the Central Vigilance Commission. Yet, instead of protection, he reportedly faced punitive consequences, while those under scrutiny continued in their positions. Such situations send a deeply troubling message: When truth invites punishment and doubt invites promotion, the moral compass of the system is inverted.
Institutional Silence and Public Perception
Equally concerning is the perceived silence—or limited responsiveness—at higher levels. In matters involving major public sector enterprises, stakeholders expect visible seriousness, timely communication, and clear corrective action from the administrative ministry and the highest executive offices. Even if internal processes are underway, the absence of visible reassurance creates an impression—rightly or wrongly—of indifference or distance. In governance, perception is not secondary; it is integral to trust. Not only action, but the visibility of action, sustains public confidence.
Beyond Legal Correctness
It is often argued that in the absence of proven charges, there exists no legal barrier to appointments. While legally valid, public institutions cannot be guided by legality alone. They depend on trust. Leadership must not only be legally sound, but ethically beyond question. The real test is simple: Does the decision inspire confidence—or does it raise doubt?
The Silent Cost
Institutional decline rarely occurs abruptly. It unfolds quietly—through decisions that are technically correct but ethically unsettling. Over time, such signals accumulate:
That rules matter more than values
That speaking up carries personal risk
That accountability exists, but only in form
Once such perceptions take root, restoring trust becomes far more difficult than correcting processes.
Time for Course Correction
The way forward lies not merely in investigation, but in restoring institutional balance:
Vigilance must be real, not ritualistic
Leadership must reflect character, not just competence
Whistleblowers must be protected, not penalized
Transparency must replace silence
Institutions are strengthened not by compliance alone, but by conviction. The Bhagavad Gita reminds us: “यद्यदाचरति श्रेष्ठस्तत्तदेवेतरो जनः” (3.21) Whatever a leader does, others follow. The conduct of those at the top shapes the culture of the entire organisation. When leadership is above suspicion, trust deepens. When it is not, doubt spreads silently but surely.
This is not merely about one appointment. It is about the standards we choose to uphold. If vigilance becomes a formality and integrity becomes negotiable, the greatest loss will not be financial—it will be the erosion of trust. And once trust is lost, rebuilding it is far more difficult than rebuilding any institution.
(The writer is an EX General Manager of SAIL and writes on spirituality and Ethics blogonethix.blogspot.com)
Editor’s Note: The recent developments within the Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) have, without an iota of doubt, severely dented the public image of the Maharatna steel PSU. Despite this, senior officials in the Ministry of Steel appear to be in deep slumber, for reasons best known to them. It is high time that the top brass in the Ministry steps in decisively to restore the credibility of this high-profile PSU, rather than allowing repeated episodes to further tarnish its reputation.
