the 15th July which says "In the morning H. M. Patel re: Insurance. Now things to be done only through Committee but limited investment also to be done now." Then there is an entry on the 31st July, 1956, which says: "Delhi: H. M. Patel", and another entry on the same day in a separate diary which says "Delhi with Haridasji (Mundhra) After lunch called on Govindlalji Maharaj (of Nathdwara) with Haridasji. Them T. T. K. Then H. M. Patel, D. L. Mazumdar (I. C. S.) and B. K. Nehru (I. C. S. ) Had talk with them reexisting business and other matters".

Next there is an entry on the 23rd September, 1956, as follows:- "10 A. M. T. T. K." and in another diary of that date-"Went with Haridasji to T. T. Krishnamchari. Then to Manubhai Shah (Minister of Industries) at his house and had long discussions".

Donations To Congress

Mr. Mundhra tells us that early in January, 1957, or thereabouts-he was not sure of the date-he made two large donations to the Congress Party funds. He paid the He paid the U. P. Congress Party 1 laks of rupees and he paid the Central Congress Party in Calcutta a lak of rupees. Though he said in one place that he had paid the money, it appears from a later statement that the cash came from the coffers of certain of his companies, and Mr. R. L. Powell (Deputy Managing Director of the B.I.C.) told us that the lak and a half came from the funds of some of the B. I. C. subsidiaries. The Calcutta donation of a lak came from the funds of Richardson & Cruddas. Mr. Mundhra said that the U.P. donation was the biggest single donation he ever made. We are told that these donations are shown in the books of the companies concerned, so we have no reason to doubt that the moneys were paid as stated.

Mr. Mundhra added, quite unnecessarily, because that was not suggested in the question, "No other people in Delhi or the Government were at all concerned with it." Even after the Chairman told him that there was no accusation against anybody personally, he added at the end of the answer to the next question: "The Delhi Ministers or anybody has not approached or suggested".

He said he made donations to other parties also, but when pressed about this, it narrowed down to one party only, namely, the Socialist Party, and the extent of the donation was only Rs. 5,000. Mr. Mundhra then volunteered the following statement: "The position is, as far as the Congress is concerned, I had, principally, faith in my mind. That was one. Another is, all the other industrialists and everybody have been paying and I have paid less compared with the people who paid to it."

Meetings with T.T.K & Patel

On the 9th January, 1957, Mr. Sodhani's diary has the following entry-"T.T. Krishnamchari". Mr. Krishnamachari says that Mr. Mundhra had asked for an interview on that date, but speaking from his own diary, he said that Mr. Mundhra did not turn up.

It is proved that Mr. Mundhra left Calcutta for Delhi on the 17th January 1957, by the night plane and that he arrived in Delhi on the 18th Morning. Mr. Sodhani's diary of the 18th has an entry: "T. T. Krishnamchari,". Mr. Krishnamchari, speaking again from his diary, says that he saw Mr. Mundhra on that day. On the next day, the 19th January, 1957, Mr. Sodhani's diary has an entry "H. M. Patel", and Mr. Patel, speaking from his diary, says that he must have seen Mr. Mundhra on that date.

:

Mr. Patel was in Bombay from 31st January till the 4th February, 1957. He left Bombay by morning 'plane at 8.30. Mr. Mundhra arrived in Bombay the same morning from Calcutta, having travelled by the night plane, and he then left Bombay for Calcutta the same night. They, therefore, coincided in Bombay for an hour or so, at any rate, at the aerodrome, though there is nothing to show that they met.

Meeting in Bombay

On the 9th February, 1957, Mr. Mundhra left Calcutta for Delhi by train and presumably arrived the next day. Three days later, on the 13th February, 1957, Mr. Sodhani's diary again has Mr. Patel's name in it. But Mr. Patel denies that he saw either Mr. Sodhani or Mr. Mundhra that day. Anyway. Mr. Patel left Delhi for Ahmedabad and for an L.I.C. meeting in Bombay three days later, namely, on February 16, 1957, and at

tended the meeting in Bombay on 18th February, 1957. On that date, the Investment Committee decided to invest Rs. 15 laks in the shares of four engineering firms, one of which was Jessop & Co. The next day, the 19th February, 1957, the Executive Committee of the L.I.C. (not the Investment Committee) passed a Resolution saying that "It shall be the responsibility of Chairman to direct the purchase and sale of investments. In this be will be guided by the Investment Committee and he will make investments bearing

in mind the recommendations of the Investment Committee."

On the 9th March, 1957, the L.I.C. bought 10,000 Jessops shares through brokers as directed by the Investment Committee on the 18th February, 1957. The Investment Committee met again on the 25th March, 1957, and resolved on a purchase of a further 50,000 shares in Jessops Ordinary direct from Mr. Mundhra. Mr. Patel was, of course, present at that meeting.

One of the Secretariat Reception Registers shows that Mr. Sodhani and Mr. Mundhra interviewed Mr. Patel at his office in Delhi on the 1st April, 1957, that is, six days after the Bombay decision. Mr. Patel, speaking from his diary, says that he saw Mr. Mundhra on that day. Mr. Sodhani says that he took Mr. Mundhra as far as Mr. Patel's office and left him there. He says that he did not see Mr. Patel himself and that he himself probably waited in the Private Secretary's room that adjoined Mr. Patel's room. Mr. Mundhra denies that he had any talk with Mr. Patel about that time. We can, therefore, accept the fact that Mr. Mundhra did see Mr. Patel on the 1st April, 1957.

When Mr. Patel was asked what they talked about, he told us that he could remember the conversation, but when asked, "Did he at any time talk to you about the L.1.C. investment?" Mr. Patel answered, "No. He never talked about or suggested that L.I.C. should invest in his concerns." Curious & Unnatural Conduct

This meeting between Mr. Patel and Mr. Mundhra was at 12.35 P.M. on the 1st. Within a few hours of this, Mr. Mundhra caught the evening plane for Bombay and saw Mr. Vaidyanathan there. On the 4th April, 1957, Mr.

Mundhra wrote a letter to Mr. Vaidyanathan saying, "I confirm as per our oral talk having sold to you 50,000 ordinary shares. of the Jessop & Co. Ltd."

It seems curious that this matter should not have been mentioned when Mr. Mundhra saw Mr. Patel on the 1st. After all, it had been decided, only a week earlier, by the Investment Committee, of which Mr. Patel was Chairman, to make the purchase, and Mr. aight from the meeting for that purpose. It Mundhra seems to have gone to Bombay stris all the more strange that the deal should have been left entirely to Mr. Vaidyanathan so soon after the resolution of the Executive Committee on the 19th February, 1957, throwing responsibility for investments on the Chairman, and that the Chairman should not even speak about it to Mr. Mundhra. We feel that this conduct is unnatural. Why shoud they fight shy of this topic, or, if it was discussed, fight shy of telling us? However, there it is. Both deny that the subject was referred to.

Mr. Mundhra says that he saw Mr. Vaidyanathan in Bombay between the 1st, when he arrived there, and the 4th, when he wrote the letter. Sometime after this interview, Mr. Vaidyanathan went to Delhi and then he left Delhi for Bombay on the 6th April, 1957. There is nothing to show that he met Mr. Patel in Delhi, but it would be unnatural for him not to have seen him there.

Coincidental Meetings

Mr. Patel left Delhi for Bombay at 2 P. M. on the 8th April, 1957, and arrived there at 5 P. M. for another L. I. C. meeting. Mr. Mundhra was still there but he left for Calcutta by the night plane. They, therefore, coincided in Bombay for a few hours though there is nothing to show that they met.

On the 19th April, 1957, Mr. Mundhra arrived in Bombay early in the morning Mr. Patel arrived in Bombay at 10.30 the same night for an L.I.C. meeting. Mr. Mundhra then left for Calcutta on the 20th April, 1957, after the L.I.C. meeting. Again, there is nothing to show that they met.

There is a curious repetition of pattern in these movements. Their visits coincide on (Continued on page 47)

And

Mr. C. D. Deshmukh, Chairman of the University Grants Commission, who had resigned as India's Finance Minister in 1956, said, in the course of the second and the last of the series of the V. S. Srinivas Sastri Endowment Lectures at Madras University on July 11, that it was now recognised, albiet somewhat grudgingly that the administrative machinery at all levels, from Minis terial donwards, had become "erratic and inadequate", both in the conduct of day-today affairs and in the implementation of planned development.

The theme of Mr. Desmukh's lectures was, "Citizens of No Mean Country", and in the second lecture, after posing the question, "Have the citizens of India given a good account of themselves as free citizens of no mean country", he surveyed the present situation in the country in all its aspects. He deplored the fall in both administrative and ethical standards.

Increase In Corruption

The public, Mr. Deshmukh, who before becoming a Minister in the Union Govern.. ment had a long and distinguished career ir the Indian Civil Service, said, heard of nepotism, highhandedness, gerrymandering, feathering of nests through progeny and many other sins of commission and omissior and yet was helpless for lack of precise data, facts and evidence. In order to deal with such a situation a high level, impartial standing judicial tribunal was called for to investigate and report on complaints or receive information. "If such a commission is es

(Continued from page 45) the 4th February, 1957, leaving just enough time to meet at the aerodrome if they so wanted. Their visits coincide again for a short time on the 8th April, 1957. The same thing happens on the 19th April, 1957. Mr. Mundhra does not live in Bombay, nor does Mr. Patel. Their visits to the city are brief. But they happen to overlap in the same sort of way on three occasions, and, as we shall see later, it continues to happen on other occasions as well. (To Be Continued)

belief that whilst, owing to the limitations imposed by democracy, ministers with inadequate intelligence, education, culture or talent, administrative capacity, sincerity of purpose, qualities of leadership, even basic honesty could or indeed might be where they were because they were backed by a powerful vote, officials must unfailingly rise to the occasion, evince a missionary spirit, spurn temptation, speak and write and advise without fear or favour and generally make up for the failings of both the ruler and the ruled, the masters, that is, the people and their chosen public servants, viz. the Ministers.