Bhubaneswar: On the eve of Rajya Sabha elections, all political parties in the state have stepped up efforts to keep their MLAs united and prevent cross-voting.
However, it has been reported that several MLAs from the Opposition BJD and Congress have not been seen around for the past three days and are not staying with their respective groups, raising concerns over the development.
Meanwhile, fresh discussions have emerged over the candidatures of BJD’s Rajya Sabha nominee Santrupt Misra and joint Opposition candidate Datteswar Hota.
BJD president Naveen Patnaik has intensified efforts to ensure that all his party MLAs cast their votes in favour of the party candidate. The party is also leaving no stone unturned to persuade disgruntled MLAs.
Also Read: Sana, Arvind asked to vote for BJD nominee
Two days ago, 14 BJD MLAs visited the residence of former legislator and now-expelled leader Pravat Biswal, in an attempt to convince him.
Notably, Pravat’s son Souvic is currently the BJD MLA from the Choudwar-Cuttack constituency.
Patnaik Saturday summoned the MLAs who had gone to meet Pravat to Naveen Niwas and asked them about the outcome of their visit.
In response, the legislators told Patnaik that Biswal had alleged that a trust was opened in Delhi and that party funds had been misappropriated through it.
After this, Patnaik asked whose name the account had been opened under.
The MLAs reportedly told him that the account had been opened in his (Patnaik’s) name.
They said the transactions were being carried out through a trust in which Patnaik’s confidante VK Pandian, is the chairman and Santrupt the secretary.
Hearing this, Patnaik instantly asked his personal assistant to call Santrupt, said reports, adding when Santrupt arrived, Patnaik asked why he was not speaking with Pravat over the telephone and what exactly Pravat was claiming.
When Patnaik questioned him about the alleged Delhi account mentioned by Pravat, Santrupt reportedly rejected the claim, saying no such account exists.
However, a million-dollar question is if Naveen Patnaik was unaware of the matter, how was his Delhi residence cited as the address during the trust’s registration, without his permission? Some MLAs, after leaving Naveen Niwas and observing Santrupt’s expressions, have started saying that the allegations raised by Pravat might be true.
At the same time, discussions are being held among the party MLAs about increasing the number of first-preference votes for Datteswar Hota.