I don’t know the ins and outs of this case but my instinct is to prefer this ‘Waterman’ Rajendra Singh.

He says:

“Rivers cannot be saved by people who have hunger for power and posts. They can only be saved by connecting people with the mission.”

He may as well say (and this is what I believe):

“Our planet cannot be saved by people who have hunger for power and posts. It can only be saved by connecting people with the mission.”

The reaction of the ‘Baba’s’ followers to Singh’s accusations of fraud is interesting:

“shocked and dismayed that someone who had, at one time, set out to do good work should have been reduced to this sort of low personal attack on a most revered being”

I have a certain prejudice against ‘revered beings’ I suppose. I generally assume that those setting themselves above and apart from other humans are likely to be bad sorts.

This is of course a general observation. Nothing in the article give me anything factual to go on with regard to the rights and wrongs in this case. It just reports opposing assertions.