I was a tiny manufacturer entrepreneur, using Aluminium as a Raw
Material. I sent one revolving LC to Hindalco for supply of a particular
Aluminium item. But in the meantime since the Black-Market assumed a dominating
factor, Hindalco refused to supply the same against the promised goods and sent
back the LC. I started to collect Information from different sources relating
to the production, supply and other activities relating to Hindalco. In 1974, I
called a Press Conference, in which one Mr. Samarjeet Ghosh, was also present
on behalf of the Economic Times. Firstly, he raised a question, taking me to be
a Marwari. After hearing my response, he called me in his Office and after
being satisfied about my honesty, integrity and commitment to the cause, he
started publishing my interviews in the Economic Times, regularly based on
“Information” collected by me, through various sources to support and promote
the cause of SSI Sector. The vested interests of Hindalco started getting
affected seriously, and hence the pressure started building up to mount on the
management of the Times of India Group of Newspapers. Consequent to the
pressure brought by the bosses of the management to stop publication of my
interviews, Mr. Samarjeet Ghosh’s plain response was that he was doing his
professional duties in exposing the wrong doings of the Monopoly House. Hence,
if they could contradict any of the information as told by Mr. Choraria (means
me), he would not publish any of his interview in future. After sitting more
than three months in the National Library, I searched various papers, reports,
documents, and obtained copies of more than thousand pages. After studying the
various Tariff Commission Reports on Aluminium Industry, and Balance Sheets of
Hindalco and Indal of several consecutive years, I prepared a Study Report
giving details relating to the manipulation of the Cost and quantity of
Aluminium by Hindalco, which seriously affected the larger public interests.
Times of
India Group and HINDALCO
Before publishing the aforesaid Study, on Monoply Aluminium
Producers, Mr. Samarjeet Ghosh wanted to check the veracity of my Study by
referring it to some accounting and costing experts, and as such he gave it to
Mr. A. K. Biswas, (If I am not wrong about the name) the First President /
Chairman of the Indian Institute of the Cost Accountants, which then had its
Head Quarters at Kolkata. After getting approval from Mr. Biswas, Mr. Samarjeet
Ghosh published the said large Report in Six Columns of the Economic Times
dated 2nd August, 1975. Immediately thereafter, within few months, Mr.
Samarjeet Ghosh was transferred to Pune, on
compromise for advertisements in its Group Newspapers, including on 1st
January, 1976, 26th January, 1976, 2nd February, 1976 and
8th March, 1976, large size advertisement was published under
heading: Prime Minister’s 20 Program promises a new era of progress and
prosperity”. The aforesaid story was seriously affected the interests
of Hindalco, since the period was under Emergency. As a result, the Company
took the help and services of one Dr. Chakradhari Agarwal to conduct one
Seminar on behalf of the alleged SSI Aluminum Industry. The purpose of the
seminar was just to backstab our 'Movement for equal distribution at fair price'
of Aluminium. Most funniest part of the fact was that the said
advertisement was never published in Birla's own Newspaper Hindustan Times or
any of its Group of Newspaper.
HINDALCO's
SWISS TRANSFER
In view of such exposures being brought out by me, one Top
Official from Hindalco, secretly got in touch with me and gave me some secret
information relating to Swiss Transfers of the money by Hindalco. I being a
small Shareholder of Hindalco raised the question before Mr. G. D. Birla, the
then Chairman of Hindalco. In reaction to that I was threatened, by one Mr.
Tejraj of M/S. Jugraj Tejraj, Kolkata, in presence of Mr. A. K. Agarwal: who
was subsequently elevated as President of Hindalco. Further, I also got a legal
Notice from a big Solicitor firm of Mumbai. However, in spite of such threats,
I sent the whole matter to Mr. Samarjeet Ghosh at Pune, which was published in
the Economic Times of 8th March, 1976, under the heading 'Shareholder's Right'.
Based on the publication of the said News, matter was raised in the Parliament
and the then Industry Minister Mr. T. A. Pai assured the house to conduct an
inquiry, which however was never done.
Assurances from the Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi
Price of Aluminium was a controlled item, and as such our campaign
for the cause of equitable distribution at fair prices prevailed, even when
Smt. Indira Gandhi again became Prime Minister in 1980. It was reported that
the then Steel Minister Sri Pranab Mukherjee was playing in the hands of the
Hindalco, and as such he prepared a proposal for the enhancement of the control
price of Aluminium. Prior to that Hindalco had also moved in Kolkata High
Court, wherein SSI Aluminum users had petitioned, under my leadership, to
intervene. Our Intervention Petition was opposed by a battery of several senior
Lawyers including Shri Siddharth Shankar Ray, the Ex-Chief Minister of West
Bengal, Mr. Dipankar Gupta, Mr. Bhaskar Gupta. I had just one Lawyer Mr. P. K.
Ray, Bar-at-law. Mr. Milon Bannerjee, the then Addl. Solicitor General of India
(Now Attorney General of India) appeared on behalf of the MMTC.
I prepared a detailed printed Memorandum, in 16 Pages, with
appropriate data in support of our claim and submitted it to Prime Minister
Smt. Indira Gandhi, with copies to the then all MPs. She gave us the assurance
to look into the matter.
Even after getting the assurance from the PM, I was told that Sri
Pranab Mukherjee is getting ready with a proposal to get approval from the
cabinet for an increase in the price of the controlled Aluminium. There being a
clash of political interests between the then Energy Minister Mr. Abdul Gani
Khan Choudhury, and the then Steel Minister Mr. Pranab Mukherjee, and to take
advantage of the same, I apprised the Private Secretary of Sri Choudhury about
the alleged unwarranted patronage being given to Hindalco by Sri Pranab
Mukherjee. He, in turn, briefed Sri Gani Khan Choudhury the entire matter,
based on our 16 Page printed Memorandum. Sri Choudhury being the head of the
Ministry, which controlled the user consuming the Aluminium, ordered an
internal enquiry in the matter. The matter was published in the Economic Times,
dated 8th December, 1980. However, since Mr. Pranab Mukherjee always had better
opportunities in preference to others, he pushed his proposal for consideration
by the Cabinet. I had to send a long Telegram to the Prime Minister, giving
reference of the assurances she gave in response to out Memorandum. As a result
of which the matter was returned by the Cabinet, without considering it.
REPORTED
REMARKS FROM SMT. INDIRA GANDHI
I can't say whether this is correct or not, but it was reported
that whenever Smt. Gandhi wanted to do something and some one opposes with
facts and figures, she had standing instructions for the respective Secretary,
not to place the matter for her consideration for second time. However, Mr.
Pranab Mukherjee, again pushed the proposal for consideration by the Cabinet.
Taking a cue from the aforesaid report, this time instead of sending directly
to Smt. Gandhi, I sent another telegram to Dr. P. C. Alexander, the then
Principle Secretary to the Prime Minister, with a request to place the telegram
when the respective matter comes up for consideration by the Cabinet.
Reportedly, once again the matter was sent back without any consideration by
the Cabinet. However, since Mr. Pranab Mukherjee was committed, for his
assurances given to the Monopoly House, to get the approval from the Cabinet for
the enhancement of the Control Price of Aluminium, he once again pushed, for
the third time, to get the approval from the Cabinet. Since, I was in constant
touch, with my contacts, to keep myself well informed about the developments
taking place, hence this time, I sent my fresh salvo of Telegram to the Cabinet
Secretary with similar request. It was reported that after seeing the third
Telegram, on the same issue, at appropriate time, from me, (each telegram at
the time of each Cabinet Meeting with the agenda on the same issue) Mrs. Indira
Gandhi said: Look Mr. Mukherjee, this man appears to be a mad one for his
concerns and will make you mad as well. So don't place this proposal again and
again and she put her objection in writing against the proposal. The authenticity
of such remarks can only be verified by Mr. Pranab Mukherjee, alone.
ADMINISTRATION
OF JUSTICE
As already stated that prior to our aforesaid approach to the PM,
Hindalco had filed a Writ Petition in Kolkata High Court (Hindlaco's Head
Office was in Mumbai, and Factory was in UP). The Hon’ble Justice Mr. Dipak Sen
heard my intervention petition and rejected on the grounds that the Petitioners
are not the directly interested party in the matter. The number of Senior
Lawyers including Ex-CM of WB Sri Sidhhartha Shankar Ray opposed my Petition
against Hindalco. Mr. Dipankar Gupta, Bar-at-law, was also amongst them.
Subsequently, I started sending telegrams to the Ministry of Steel, in view of
the poor pleadings of the Government pleaders against Hindalco. The Judgment
was reserved by Justice Sen. However, after a lapse of more than a year, but
within a few days from the said third time return of the proposal submitted by
Mr. Pranab Mukherjee, Mr. Justice Dipak Sen, passed an interim Order, without announcing
his Judgment. I lodged my complaint before the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India
and met Mr. Kalyan Ray, M.P. from CPI, who could raise the issue in Parliament.
Finally Hindalco lost the said case in the Supreme Court.
I BECAME FIRST INDIVIDUAL TO GAVE EVIDENCE
BEFORE ANY PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE
I do admit that Mr. Samarjeet Ghosh, could found me an honest and
true citizen, and as such he introduced me to one of his friend (Late) Mr.
Jyotirmoy Basu, M. P. from C.P.I.(M) Party. Initially Mr. Basu was not prepared
to entertain me, possibly because of his bias against the Marwari community,
probably because of certain misconceptions viewing every businessmen as an
exploiter of the community. Mr. Samarjeet Ghosh was not surprised and advised
to have patience and keep silence for a while. During this intermission, Mr.
Jyotirmoy Basu got engaged on telephone with some one on some vital issue and
got enraged concerning some point in the balance sheet of the Jute Corporation,
since he had very recently been appointed Chairman of the Parliamentary Public
Undertaking Committee (PUC). This incidence relates to the period of Janta
Party Regime. It was obvious for him, to get interested in examining the
working of the Jute Corporation, which was a Government of India undertaking.
At this point of time, taking advantage of the crucial moment, Mr. Samarjeet
Ghosh said to him that he could recommend one, who could well be termed as a
creature of Balance Sheets, but this one is none other than the one whom you
are not interested even to talk with. In reaction to this, Mr. Basu angrily
threw the whole Balance Sheet with a bang on my face. Surprisingly, I was just
taken aback. For a moment, I just remembered God, and as soon I opened a page
of the Balance Sheet, there was before my eyes, an entry of Rs.22 Crores (Odd)
as outstanding over Six Months. Immediately I handed back the Balance Sheet to
Mr. Basu, pointing out that this amount reflects some sort of a fraud. Mr. Basu
asked me to explain as to how this could be a fraud. I asked him, whether he
has read the ‘Tondon Committee Report?’
Immediately he could
realise that I was talking about the principles relating to the
double / multiple finance. After that, he took time to sit along with me for
more than 3 long hours and discussed in depth about the various issues relating
to ‘Jute’. Thereafter he asked me whether can I repeat the same, whatever I
have said just now, in front of no less than 22 Parliamentarians. Having been
exhausted owing to the long discussion that we had, I accepted the offer,
without going into its pros and cones. Thereafter, he invited me to appear
before the Parliamentary Public Undertaking Committee (PUC) to give evidence
regarding the matters relating to ‘Jute Corporation’.
EXPERIENCES
OF PUC
Since we had the entire discussion in Bengali, Mr. Basu could
never imagine that I was one of those who had the least educational
qualification. On appearing before the Committee, I found that there is a
tussle between the Members from South and North. The point of contention being
that the Members from South wanted to hear me in English, while those from
North wanted me to speak in Hindi. At this point of time, I told them that I am
not conversant to speak in English. It was a great surprise to Mr. Basu, and to
an extent even some shock. Finally I gave my evidence in Hindi. Though the
period for my deposition was fixed for half an hour, but, it went on for almost
two and a half hours. After that, I was even invited for dinners, by a couple
of MP's, among whom were also Ms. Chandrawati from Haryana, Mr. K. Lakkappa
from Kerala, and Mr. Gunanand Thakur from Bihar. This was a unique experience
for me, as during the evidence, I learnt that I was an exception to have been
invited inadvertently in my individual capacity as being a first case of this
nature, for deposition before any Parliamentary Committee. This was revealed to
me only when some Members raised their objections for myself being invited in
my individual capacity only. At the time of the dinner, Mr. Gunanand Thakur
told me that Mr. Basu regards your evidence to be of a very crucial nature, and
for this very reason he had also called various investigating agencies to be
able to hear me.
I
SUCCESSFULLY OPPOSED THE MEGER OF INDAL WITH M & M
I had spent my precious
time to make a study on Aluminium Industry, and with full support of the Media,
I was able to build a strong voice against the wrong doings by the Aluminium
Industry at that point of Time. INDAL was Indian unit of ALCAN Canada. M&M
was also having collaboration with a foreign Company. Both the foreign groups
decided to make a merger of INDAL into M&M. While, I was opposing it with
all the facts and figures, at various levels, not only before the Company Law
Board and MRTP Commission but also in the Supreme Court and also in Kolkata
High Court. The news covering my opposition were published as ‘leading news’ in
the Financial Express and Economic Times. Government of India had always
favoured the big business houses, at times even at the cost of larger public
interest. The result was that on 15th December, 1983 Chairman of INDAL Mr.
Keshab Mahindra took steps to inform all the shareholders interalia that:
“At their respective
meetings held on 26 September and 4 October the Shareholders of Mahindra &
Mahindra Limited and INDAL approved the Scheme of Amalgamation between two
Companies by the requisite majorities. Both Companies submitted their
petitions to the respective High Courts in Bombay and Calcutta for confirmation
of the Scheme. The Central Government's approval under the MRTP Act is also
awaited. Sd/-Keshb Mahindra, Chairman 15 December 1983”.
After the said message, on
6th January, 1984, I sent a Telegram to CJI, giving reference to my petitions
before the SC and Kolkata High Court, Company law Board and MRTP Commission
with the prayer that all the matters be together heard by the SC itself.
Resultantly, on 16 February, 1984, Mr. Keshub Mahindra informed all the
Shareholders of INDAL interalia that:
“I greatly regret to say
that Government has been fit to reject our application as not being expedient
in the public interest.”
This is to be referred that
in this case of INDAL too, Mr. Dipankar Gupta, the Barrister, was the Counsel
of INDAL. So he took this defeat of his client as his own and that is why,
since then he has never spared any occasion to let go without causing damage to
my lawful rights. Subsequently, Sri Keshub Mahindra and Field Marshal Sam Manek
Shaw, opted to resign from the Board of Directors of INDAL.
HIDING
LIABILITIES OF PEERLEES, KOLKATA WERE EXPOSED BY ME
I made a study of the Balance Sheet of the Peerless, with regard
to a period of four years and found that there was a hiding liability to
the tune of Rs.172 Crores. Thereafter, I made a representation, dated 28th
November, 1994, to the Governor of the RBI. When subsequently the matter came
up before the SC in January, 1996 it was revealed that the hiding liability was
as high as around Rs.700 Crores. In this case Sri Somnath Chatterjee, (then
M.P.), was the Counsel for the Peerless. Consequently, the then Peerless
Chairman Mr. P. C. Sen had to resign around 16th January, 1996, from the
Chairmanship of the Peerless.
No comments:
Post a Comment