India Today Cover Story [Tata-AGP Face Off: Targetting Tata]

Refusing to take no for an answer, ULFA insisted on a meeting. It took place on May 25 in a Bangkok hotel. Four Tata Tea officials -- S.S. Dogra, Gogoi, Dipankar Borah and P.R. Ganapathy -- met Barua and were presented with additional demands, including an annual tax. The minutes of this meeting was submitted to Kumar. On June 11, Tata Tea informed ULFA of its inability to meet these demands but its willingness to step up welfare activities. Six days later, Kumar received a stern telephone call from the ULFA chief asking for a definite reply. It was in response to that threat that the Medical Aid scheme was evolved whereby the company would pick up the tab for hospital costs of people recommended by ULFA. Gogoi was selected to sell the package to the ULFA chief at a meeting in Dhaka in early July.

The first case under this scheme was referred by ULFA in November when a patient was treated in Jaslok Hospital, Mumbai. Thereafter, in June this year, a lady whose name was given as Bonti Baruah was recommended for treatment in a pregnancy-related blood disorder. She was subsequently found to be ULFA's culture secretary.

The striking feature of this round of Tata Tea's dealing with ULFA is not merely the approved role of Gogoi, but the role of the authorities. Although company officials are silent, a senior intelligence source has indicated that top Tata Tea officials met a senior officer in the IB on at least three occasions and cleared the schemes. "There is formal communication between the IB and Tata Tea on the Bangkok and Dhaka visits. The Tatas even requested embassy protection in Bangkok which we refused. We gave the green signal to the medical scheme. The letters are in the IB office in Delhi." The role of the IB is further corroborated by the bjp's own account of Wadia's discussions with L.K. Advani. However, no confirmation of any IB role in the meeting with Bodo insurgents in Delhi on February 12 this year is available.

If indeed the authorities were kept informed by Tata Tea at every stage, the indignation of the Assam Government is inexplicable. As yet, there is no evidence of the Tatas having paid cash to ULFA -- there are cheque payments to hospitals, hotels and travel agencies -- but a captured National Democratic Front of Bodoland document indicates a sum of Rs 24 lakh paid by Macneil and Magor and a further Rs 10 lakh paid by Nandan Nayer Tea Estate. Mahanta knows this. Yet, only Tata Tea is being targeted.

Mahanta's perceived proximity to Kerkar and his lobbying for a proposal by Cox and Kings -- headed by Kerkar's son Peter -- indicates a degree of involvement in the internal problems of Bombay House. Kumar's appointment in Indian Hotels is the first real choice exercised by Ratan Tata. J.J. Irani of Tisco was appointed during the lifetime of J.R.D. Tata and Darbari Seth of Tata Chemicals stepped down in favour of his son. Putting a cloud of controversy over Kumar ends up weakening the authority of Ratan Tata. More so since this battle is not being fought in the marketplace. It is centred on politics, an area that is outside his experience. This is possibly why he is now leaning heavily on Wadia -- a person with expertise in fighting larger battles. The danger, of course, is that the Tatas could end up appearing no different from the rest.

Then there is Mahanta's ego. There are indications that Tata Tea has been wary of disclosing its hand to the state after its letter to the Assam Government in January 1996 was leaked to the ULFA. It has acted on the belief that the Centre will communicate with the state Government. This may be a naive assumption in an era of coalition politics, but in matters affecting lives, the Tatas may just have been cautious. To Mahanta, this seems a "conspiracy", but to many in Assam the real problem is the unflinching Tata principle of not paying. The principle has a certain universality which Ratan Tata finds natural. Others don't share that assumption. Which may be why the corporate house that gave India its first taste of industry finds itself being dubbed anti-national.

RATAN TATA
"Tata Tea has been prejudged"

Ratan Tata, chairman of Tata Tea and chief of the Tata group, spoke to Deputy Editor SWAPAN DASGUPTA in Mumbai. Excerpts:

Do you feel Tata Tea has been unfairly treated in this matter?

Quite frankly I do. The Assam Government and sections of the press have prejudged Tata Tea to be guilty even before it has been heard.

Why do you think you are being wilfully targeted?

I don't know if we are being wilfully targeted. But we are certainly being treated in a manner which is not fair and just. Tata Tea has done nothing wrong and, certainly, nothing that is anti-national.

Can you detect any motive behind such grave charges?

There are stories in the market, of individuals, vested interests. I would prefer not to speculate on that.

Do you think the welfare activities of Tata Tea correspond to the overall philosophy of Tatas?

A. Absolutely. Tata Tea has not undertaken welfare activities in Assam only to appease any segment of the population. It has far more intensive schemes in south India, which does not suffer from this problem (terrorism). It has endeavoured to be a good corporate citizen. And whatever the company has done, it has done to protect its own people.

This sort of situation is quite unique in corporate history. What do you expect the Central and the state governments to do?

From everything one hears, many companies have been paying money to the extremists. Tata Tea has not. Tata Tea made counter-proposals of putting investments into Assam and, in this particular case, extended facilities in terms of medical treatment through payments directly to hospitals -- not to individuals and not to associations. I don't understand why Tata Tea is being picked upon. In fact, we should be applauded for what we have done.

Does the controversy undermine the Tata Group, its reputation?

The way this entire matter is being projected, I cannot help but feel there is an underlying objective to besmirch the reputation of Tatas. But there has been no change in the manner in which Tatas have operated.

By far, the softer option for Tata Tea all these years would have been to pay cash. That would have made us no different from others. But, if I might say so, that appears to be the approved way of operating.

Are you suggesting that had you simply paid cash Tata Tea may not have landed in such a mess?

A. I am not saying that. But in today's context it would appear to be acceptable. I don't see anything happening to persons who have taken that route. So, quite frankly I am confused. I didn't know providing humanitarian aid through a hospital to persons of Assamese origin, irrespective of their affiliation, was such a heinous crime.

P K MAHANTA
"There's a plot to pull us down"

P.K. Mahanta, Assam chief minister spoke to Principal Correspondent AVIROOK SEN. Excerpts:

Were you informed that Tata Tea had kept the IB posted on its contacts with ULFA?

I have not been told anything. Tata Tea claims they had IB authorisation. But the IB has no right to authorise anyone to wine and dine extremists. Even the home minister wasn't aware of the ulfa meetings. It seems there is a conspiracy to destabilise the Government.

Who is behind it?

I wouldn't like to say anything now. All tea companies, except the Tatas, assured us cooperation in fighting militancy.

Several tea companies have been paying Bodo militants. Why single out Tata Tea?

CID investigations are on. Let's see what comes out of it.

Documents show that the AGP signed an agreement with ULFA in June after which they allowed a public meeting in your constituency.

We don't require anyone's permission to hold public meetings. Such things can be easily fabricated.

October 20, 1997