ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846
-A A +A

Stainless, Anyone

December 23, 1972 NOT one of any of the managers, designers, consultants and Ministers concerned comes out stainless in the continuing controversy over stainless steel and the rapidly changing 'firm and final' decisions on the subject based more on politics than on technology. Should you say 'yes' to Durgapur and 'no' to Salem or say 'no' to both? A bold 'no' would have been sensible because large quantities of stainless steel are as relevant to our national needs as are Urge numbers of the once-canvassed small car. The present answer from the Steel Minister, Mohan Kumaramangalam, is to claim to have said 'yes' to both Durgapur and Salem. The blame can be placed on Kumaramangalam and his predecessors in the Steel Ministry and on the management and officers and workers of Hindustan Steel who failed to produce the proper alloy steels at the proper time. Also stained are the original consultants for the Durgapur alloy steels plant, Dastur and Company, who are now the consultants for the Salem plant. It all began in the heydays of Kamaraj with the connivance of C Subramaniam. Tamil Nadu had to have a steel plant. The feasibility report came from Dastur and Company, Third class fuel (lignite) and second class iron ore were said to be capable of being politically converted into iron and steel through the creation of an integrated steel plant. The prime motivation .was not the production of steel economically but the erection of a huge plant.

Subscribers please login to access full text of the article.

New 3 Month Subscription
to Digital Archives at

826for India

$50for overseas users

Get instant access to the complete EPW archives

Subscribe now

Comments

(-) Hide

EPW looks forward to your comments. Please note that comments are moderated as per our comments policy. They may take some time to appear. A comment, if suitable, may be selected for publication in the Letters pages of EPW.

Back to Top