KNOW YOUR  EDITOR

RTI ACT EMPOWERS TO

 FIGHT CORRUPTION &

 TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS

Right to Information Act, 2005, empowers the common citizenry to get justice, to use it as a powerful tool to collect information relating to the decision making process. Since my childhood, I have been a follower of Mahatama Gandhi's principles that one is also equally responsible, who without protest accepts the wrong doings or injustices done by some one else. I always try to get 'Information', collected through various sources as knowledge/Information is said to be the ‘POWER’. With this background I have started the “RTI Times” aimed to be a meaningful journal to protect, promote and preserve the Right to Information of the Citizenry. Hence, it is pertinent for every reader of “RTI Times” to know about me.    

            In this context I would like to go back to those days when Gandhiji was just a Barrister in South Africa, known as Mr. M. K. Gandhi, where apartheid was the order of the day. There, the 1st Class compartments of the trains used to be exclusive for the use Whites. Mahatma Gandhi felt that this policy militates against the very humanity as such and hence in protest of the same travelled in a 1st Class Compartment. The result, he was in an unhuman manner physically thrown out of the 1st Class Compartment. The purpose to relate this story is that Mahatma Gandhi could normally have treated the said incidence just as an individual matter, but taking it to be an affront against the entire humanity, he stood to take the arduous task of trekking on to the path of protest.

I was always inspired by the ethos, thoughts and way of working of Mahatma Gandhi. I adopted one particular principle in my life that one should not do injustice to any one, nor bear injustice from any one, whosoever he might be. To keep this principle, time and again, I have been made to suffer great hardships. From the very childhood, I always used to oppose, whenever, I would find any injustice being done. There is a long list of such incidences,  which were not liked by several people, however, I never compromised on the same.

RTI Times

-Vs-

Right to Know

            Based on my experiments with the RTI Act, I decided to publish a magazine under the title “RTI Times” in English and submitted for the Title Verification Application on 31st August, 2006, before the Deputy Commissioner of Police, (Licensing), Delhi. Initially my application was not approved by the Registrar of Newspapers for India (RNI) on the alleged pretext that 'Full form should be given for abbreviation used for title'. I submitted RTI Application against such objection and went up to the Press Council. Finally the RNI approved the Title: “RTI Times” in my favour with reference to DM Nos. 3337 dated 31st August, 2006 and 4023 dated 21st November, 2006. However, before getting such approval, I had to take alternatively another Title: “RIGHT TO KNOW”.    

            The basic object of Right to Information Act is to ensure transparency, accountability and to contain the corruption, to ensure to ensure Good Governance with Equity : i.e. Samsashan and Sushasan. For the last more than forty years, I am working for these principles. Hence, first of all I would share some of my experiences in this respect, which would also help the people to know as to how to explore and get more and more Information from different Public Authorities.

            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,  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, Mr. Samarjeet Ghosh wanted to check the veracity of my Study by referring it to some expert, 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. Being the period of emergency, it seriously affected the interests of Hindalco. As a result, the Company took the help of one tout 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. On the other hand Hindalco obliged the Times of India Group by giving full page advertisements in its Newspapers. Finally, Mr. Samarjeet Ghosh was transferred to PUNE. Most importantly, the 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 th 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 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 he gave in response to out Memorandum to her. 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 it is correct or not, but it was reported that whenever Smt. Gandhi wants to do something and some one opposes with facts and figures, she had standing instructions for the respective Secretary, not to place the matter to be considered a 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. Resultantly, 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 Telegrams to the Cabinet Secretary with similar request. It was reported that after seeing the third Telegram from me, on the same issue (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 WAS FIRST INDIVIDUAL

WHO 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 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, Late Mr. Gunanand Thakur (the then M.P.) told me that Mr. Basu regards your evidence to be of a great importance.      

Successfully  blocked Merger of INDAL

a very crucial nature, and for this very reason he had also called various investigating agencies to be able to hear me.

I had spent my precious time to make a study on Aluminium Industry, and with full support of the Media, I  was able to built 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.