Apart from the bureaucrats mentioned in his earlier letter to the Prime Minister protesting against the CVC Ordinance, Jethmalani also intends to take up the issue of the transfer of Secretary, Urban Development, Kiran Aggarwal.

With the Minister adamant on Aggarwal's transfer and the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) tacitly supporting Aggarwal, the issue is set to snowball into a politicians-versus-bureaucracy crisis.

Meanwhile, sources in the PMO denied the office had leaked Jethmalani's letter to the press and blamed, ``those who had lost out in the race to the post of the CVC'' instead.

In an effort to muster support, the Minister is believed to have discussed the issue with other non-Bharatiya Janata Party Cabinet colleagues. Commenting on the Ordinance conferring statutory status on the CVC, Jethmalani said the Cabinet will have toconsider the views of various ministries and all the objections to the Ordinance, before it is made into an Act.

The Minister confirmed that not only had he written to the PM but had also met him, along with another member of the three-member ministerial committee set up to vet the draft Ordinance.

Differences arose between the ministers and bureaucrats during the drafting of the Ordinance, primarily over the CVC composition.

In a statement here, Jethmalani said, ``My complaint in the letter against some does not detract from my recognition of the worth and near indispensability of others. Unfortunately, the acts of a few spoil the image of the whole class. So I wish to set the record straight and put matters in perspective''.

Jethmalani elaborated that the Ordinance in its present form was not the last word on the issue. All criticism and the ``prestigious views of the Law Commission'' would be considered while converting the ordinance into an Act. The other version could not be promulgated withoutproper Cabinet examination and approval, for which there was no time, he said.

The Ordinance not only differs from the ministerial draft in terms of making the CVC a single-member body but also on making the secretary, Personnel, an ex-officio member and the inclusion of a single-point directive. Both these clauses did not feature either in the original draft approved by the ministers or the Law Commission draft.