From MoU to FIR: TOMCOM files cheating case against UP’s Fairstreet

Siasat.com impact: The complaint follows a series of investigative reports on TOMCOM’s Germany programmes. Questions about the role of TOMCOM’s own officials and gaps in its account remain.

Hyderabad: The Telangana Overseas Manpower Company Ltd (TOMCOM) has filed a police complaint against Fairstreet India Pvt Ltd, the Lucknow firm that ran its Germany Ausbildung (vocational apprenticeship) and bus-driver programmes, alleging cheating, criminal breach of trust and misappropriation of funds. It says the firm secured an overseas placement for only one candidate after receiving Rs 1.28 crore from TOMCOM.

TOMCOM General Manager K Naga Bharathi filed the complaint, and the Hyderabad Central Crime Station (CCS) police registered an FIR the same day, Thursday, November 12, under Sections 318(2), 318(3) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), read with Section 3(5). These cover, in turn, cheating (up to three years in prison, a fine, or both); cheating a person whose interests the accused was bound to protect (up to five years, a fine, or both); and cheating that dishonestly induces a person to hand over property or money (up to seven years and a fine; non-bailable). Section 3(5) applies to offences committed by several people with a common intention.

Siasat.com has a copy of the FIR. The CCS’s Economic Offences Wing is investigating.

Who the FIR names, and who it doesn’t

The FIR names the company, “represented by its Managing Director and other persons responsible for its affairs”, its Executive Director, Sudhanshu Misra, and its Business Head, Saurav Kumar Pandey. It does not name the managing director, Vatsal Bora, who is also the son of Neeraj Bora, the BJP MLA from Lucknow North.

Neeraj Bora was a director of the company from 1995 to June 2021, according to its public filings, stepping down five months after Vatsal Bora joined the board and the company changed its name from Bora Commercial Projects Pvt Ltd.

What the complaint says

The complaint says TOMCOM “collected amounts from the participating candidates (67)” and paid Fairstreet Rs 1.28 crore out of that money. Three batches underwent German language training. “As per TOMCOM’s records, 67 candidates completed the language training, out of whom 42 candidates successfully obtained B1 German language certification,” it says. “However … Fairstreet could secure overseas placement for only one candidate.”

Interviews were “deliberately arranged in different sectors”, including “retail, sales, construction and other occupations”, which did not suit several candidates, and several declined or withdrew, it says. Around 11 candidates’ B1 certification is expiring, and repeated calls to Misra and Pandey brought no “satisfactory outcome or definite placement schedule”.

TOMCOM says it was “induced” into the MoU by Fairstreet’s representations and that the firm’s conduct “prima facie indicates possible dishonest intention, diversion or misappropriation of funds, and cheating of TOMCOM and the aspirants”.

TOMCOM’s 12, Fairstreet’s one

TOMCOM counts 12 candidates from the three Fairstreet Ausbildung batches as deployed to Germany, a figure candidates disputed in Part 3 and TOMCOM repeated to Siasat.com on October 27.

The complaint credits Fairstreet, the partner TOMCOM’s records list for those batches, with only one placement. It does not refer to the 12, say whether that one is among them, or explain how the other deployments TOMCOM counts came about.

On job roles, too, it differs from what TOMCOM told Siasat.com earlier: that “candidates were placed in the roles they had opted for”, and that the 12 had their job roles explained in interviews with German employers.

Bus drivers missing from complaint

The complaint makes no mention of the bus-driver programme, though the MoU, as it describes it, covered “Germany and other international markets”, and TOMCOM’s records name Fairstreet as the batch’s partner. Not one bus driver was deployed, according to those records, as Siasat.com reported in Part 5; candidates described what they went through in Part 2.

Complaint filed months after training ended

TOMCOM and Fairstreet signed the MoU on September 13, 2024. The complaint came more than 15 months after the last batches in both programmes completed training, in mid-2025, according to TOMCOM’s records.

Siasat.com has published a series of investigative reports on the programmes since October 16, beginning with Part 1. Since then, a Human Rights Forum team has sought a probe, and on November 10, candidates confronted the General Manager, who told them, “The minister has enquired about the details, and a report will be submitted soon.” TOMCOM has yet to issue a public statement on the matter.

Fairstreet and TOMCOM

Fairstreet describes itself as the “upskilling and talent mobility arm” of Lucknow’s Bora Group, which also runs the Bora Institute of Allied Health Sciences and Sewa Hospital and Research Centre. Vatsal Bora, its founder and managing director, and his mother, Bindu Bora, are its two directors.

According to details of the MoU cited in the complaint, Fairstreet undertook to work with overseas employers, select, prepare and train candidates, arrange interviews, help with visas and departure, and assist after arrival. When Siasat.com sought the MoU under RTI, TOMCOM withheld it, saying copies “cannot be shared where disclosure is restricted by applicable data protection and confidentiality requirements”.

A Fairstreet admission letter seen by Siasat.com carries what appears to be Vatsal Bora’s signature over the company’s seal. How candidates dealt with both TOMCOM and Fairstreet, and the no-refund agreement form they were given after paying, were reported in Part 1 and Part 4.

Pandey told Siasat.com in Part 1 that Fairstreet had “diligently fulfilled its obligations” under the MoU.

Questions about TOMCOM’s role

TOMCOM advertised the programme with a “guaranteed job”, shortlisted candidates and took their fees into its account, releasing payments to Fairstreet at milestones that, it told Siasat.com, include “placement-related stages”. The complaint names only Fairstreet and its executives.

It leaves open which TOMCOM officials oversaw the programmes and approved the Rs 1.28 crore in payments, why TOMCOM went to the police more than 15 months after training ended, and what it did internally in that time. No internal inquiry has been made public. For a state-run agency that handled candidates’ money, TOMCOM has yet to publicly account for its own role.

Several questions Siasat.com has put to TOMCOM since July, under RTI and by email, also remain unanswered. Among them: batch-wise payments to partners, on which its RTI reply said “Audit under Process”, though the complaint now cites a batch-wise financial statement; and when the agreement form was introduced, on which it replied “Not Applicable”, as earlier parts of this series reported (Part 4, Part 5).

The Opposition BRS has also taken up the issue. On October 18, T Harish Rao demanded a full refund of the money collected by TOMCOM and Fairstreet, a CID or judicial probe, and a white paper comparing fees collected with placements. On October 29, BRS general secretary R S Praveen Kumar called it the “TOMCOM scam” and asked the government to address Fairstreet’s role.

TOMCOM has emailed candidates about a refund process, candidates told Siasat.com, but how much will be refunded, to how many candidates and on what basis is not clear. Siasat.com will report on it in detail in subsequent reports.

(This report is part of Siasat.com’s investigation into TOMCOM)

Get the latest updates in Hyderabad City News, Technology, Entertainment, Sports, Politics and Top Stories on WhatsApp & Telegram by subscribing to our channels. You can also download our app for Android and iOS.