More details on the jet-setting, fun-loving judge Magazine| May 16, 2005 Exclusive defence Magazine| May 16, 2005 Exclusive defence The Rs 18 Lakh/Hr Trip Outlook digs out more details of Justice Phukan's junket which clearlyshow it was pure pleasure at government expense Updates SAIKAT DATTA Were Justice S.N. Phukan and his wife denied the traditionalhospitality that the army, air force and navy are so reputed for? Thejudge who headed the Tehelka Commission and was taken on a five-dayjunket on a special VVIP air force plane, courtesy the Ministry ofDefence, insists that he did not have such a good time. But Outlookhas learnt that not only was the red carpet rolled out for the judgeand his entourage, but free trips by road were organised for him andhis wife to see the Ajanta and Ellora caves as well as a visit to theshrine of Sai Baba at Shirdi. On both occasions, the judge, his wifeand members of the commission were provided taxis which they did notpay for. It is understood that the costs incurred during the two tripswere shown as 'book adjustments' by the defence ministry. It isanother matter that no weapon systems were studied either at Shirdi,Ajanta or Ellora. Justice Phukan has also complained to the media that the VVIP planegiven to him was 'useless' and did not have proper toilet facilities.Enquiries with the IAF reveal that the IL-76 aircraft in whichJustice Phukan flew back to Delhi from Mumbai costs Rs 18 lakh forevery hour in the air. Which means for every four minutes that thejudge and his entourage flew in the plane, it cost the taxpayer a neatRs 1.5 lakh (see box). Had the judge, his wife and his eight-memberteam all flown executive class in a commercial airline, theMumbai-Delhi fare for them would have been only Rs 1.20 lakh. Instead,it cost the defence ministry Rs 72 lakh to transport them on a specialIAF plane. Ostensibly, the entire trip was to inspect weapon systems. But withtwo days devoted to sight-seeing and the time spent in flying fromDelhi to Pune and Mumbai to Delhi, the members of the commission hadeffectively just two days to 'inspect and familiarise' themselves withthe 14 weapon systems they were investigating into. In the end, thejunket cost the taxpayer nearly Rs 1 crore. While Justice Phukan maintains that he had 'all his meals in theroom', those travelling with him differ. A commission member who wason the trip told Outlook that "there was a cocktail and a dinner atAhmednagar and another one at the western naval command, Mumbai".Interestingly, Justice Phukan, who had been insisting all along that"all our meals were in our room", later stated that "it could havealso been in the dining room". The feedback Outlook has is that thetrip had more to do with holidaying than anything else. Official confirmation of the judge's trip came in a suo motu statementmade by Union defence minister Pranab Mukherjee in Parliament.Following Outlook's exposé of the Justice Phukan junket, Pranab toldthe Rajya Sabha on Wednesday: "Normally for visits of a commission,IAF aircraft are not provided." Later, the defence minister also toldthe House that "he would not think of using an IAF plane to fly to aplace where commercial flights were available." He also pointed out inhis statement that even for "entitled personages, when the journey isnot for defence purposes, the cost will be recovered according toscales prescribed from time to time". Phukan and his team were noteven in the entitled category, as Pranab clarified. Justice Phukan in his statements to the press after the Outlook exposésaid that the secretary to the commission, S.K. Dasgupta, had made allthe arrangements. The subtext was that the judge was not aware of thetrip's details.But when Dasgupta sought permission to fly by serviceaircraft on December 19, 2003, this is what he wrote in his note tothe defence ministry: "Pursuant to the submission made by the learnedcounsel for the Union of India, Honorable Chairman (Justice Phukan)has directed that equipment relating to the past defence transactionslocated at various places may be inspected. Accordingly, HonorableChairman along with team of counsel for the commission and officers ofthe commission shall visit Pune, Ahmednagar, Bangalore and Mumbaistarting 22nd December 2003 to 27th December 2003." Clearly, the judgewas not ignorant of the arrangements being made. Interestingly, in the detailed itinerary drawn up by the commissionthere was no mention of the trips to Shirdi, Ajanta and Ellora.Meanwhile, arrangements for Justice Phukan's trip had already begunwith air headquarters sending the file to then joint secretary (air),Arvind Joshi. It is learnt that Joshi processed the file and soughtthe clearance of the then defence minister, George Fernandes. Between December 22 and December 27 (when they returned to Delhi), thecommission had only two days to actually see seven weapon systems ofthe 14 they were investigating. On December 22, they landed in Pune,and on December 23 left for Ahmednagar by an Mi-17 helicopter. OnDecember 24, the commission cancelled scheduled presentations totravel to Shirdi in a five-car convoy. The commission also spent thenext day, December 25, visiting Ajanta and Ellora. On December 26,they flew by an Mi-17 helicopter to Mumbai where they were put up atthe swank western naval command officer's mess. Eyebrows were also raised about trips made by another member of thecommission. Brojendra Prasad Katakey, then one of the senior counselwith the commission, travelled to London twice on government expense.First, he was sent to deliver the Tehelka tapes to London forverification. This was after Phukan reversed the ruling of hispredecessor, Justice G. Venkataswamy, that the tapes were genuine.Katakey travelled to London again, this time carrying the equipmentthe Tehelka portal had used for recording the events that led to theinquiry. Katakey, who was later appointed an additional judge of theGauhati High Court, was unavailable for comment. Through all this, the role of former defence minister George Fernandeshas also come up for scrutiny. It was he who cleared the tripsundertaken by the judge and members of the commission. While Fernandesremained unavailable for comment despite repeated efforts, JusticePhukan maintains that his wife had to travel with him, as she was notkeeping well. A stand that is at best surprising: if she was unwell,did it make sense to take her on a hectic trip that covered Pune,Ahmednagar, Shirdi, Ajanta and Ellora and finally Mumbai in five days?Only George Fernandes and Justice Phukan can answer that. With the credibility of the report—clearing Fernandes of any misdeedsduring Kargil—the commission had submitted to the NDA governmentunder question, there is a growing demand from Congress and Left MPsthat it be ignored. As for the NDA, it has decided to stay away fromParliament and maintain a stoic silence on the junket issue.
Outlook digs out more details of Justice Phukan's junket which clearlyshow it was pure pleasure at government expense Updates SAIKAT DATTA Were Justice S.N. Phukan and his wife denied the traditionalhospitality that the army, air force and navy are so reputed for? Thejudge who headed the Tehelka Commission and was taken on a five-dayjunket on a special VVIP air force plane, courtesy the Ministry ofDefence, insists that he did not have such a good time. But Outlookhas learnt that not only was the red carpet rolled out for the judgeand his entourage, but free trips by road were organised for him andhis wife to see the Ajanta and Ellora caves as well as a visit to theshrine of Sai Baba at Shirdi. On both occasions, the judge, his wifeand members of the commission were provided taxis which they did notpay for. It is understood that the costs incurred during the two tripswere shown as 'book adjustments' by the defence ministry. It isanother matter that no weapon systems were studied either at Shirdi,Ajanta or Ellora. Justice Phukan has also complained to the media that the VVIP planegiven to him was 'useless' and did not have proper toilet facilities.Enquiries with the IAF reveal that the IL-76 aircraft in whichJustice Phukan flew back to Delhi from Mumbai costs Rs 18 lakh forevery hour in the air. Which means for every four minutes that thejudge and his entourage flew in the plane, it cost the taxpayer a neatRs 1.5 lakh (see box). Had the judge, his wife and his eight-memberteam all flown executive class in a commercial airline, theMumbai-Delhi fare for them would have been only Rs 1.20 lakh. Instead,it cost the defence ministry Rs 72 lakh to transport them on a specialIAF plane. Ostensibly, the entire trip was to inspect weapon systems. But withtwo days devoted to sight-seeing and the time spent in flying fromDelhi to Pune and Mumbai to Delhi, the members of the commission hadeffectively just two days to 'inspect and familiarise' themselves withthe 14 weapon systems they were investigating into. In the end, thejunket cost the taxpayer nearly Rs 1 crore. While Justice Phukan maintains that he had 'all his meals in theroom', those travelling with him differ. A commission member who wason the trip told Outlook that "there was a cocktail and a dinner atAhmednagar and another one at the western naval command, Mumbai".Interestingly, Justice Phukan, who had been insisting all along that"all our meals were in our room", later stated that "it could havealso been in the dining room". The feedback Outlook has is that thetrip had more to do with holidaying than anything else. Official confirmation of the judge's trip came in a suo motu statementmade by Union defence minister Pranab Mukherjee in Parliament.Following Outlook's exposé of the Justice Phukan junket, Pranab toldthe Rajya Sabha on Wednesday: "Normally for visits of a commission,IAF aircraft are not provided." Later, the defence minister also toldthe House that "he would not think of using an IAF plane to fly to aplace where commercial flights were available." He also pointed out inhis statement that even for "entitled personages, when the journey isnot for defence purposes, the cost will be recovered according toscales prescribed from time to time". Phukan and his team were noteven in the entitled category, as Pranab clarified. Justice Phukan in his statements to the press after the Outlook exposésaid that the secretary to the commission, S.K. Dasgupta, had made allthe arrangements. The subtext was that the judge was not aware of thetrip's details.But when Dasgupta sought permission to fly by serviceaircraft on December 19, 2003, this is what he wrote in his note tothe defence ministry: "Pursuant to the submission made by the learnedcounsel for the Union of India, Honorable Chairman (Justice Phukan)has directed that equipment relating to the past defence transactionslocated at various places may be inspected. Accordingly, HonorableChairman along with team of counsel for the commission and officers ofthe commission shall visit Pune, Ahmednagar, Bangalore and Mumbaistarting 22nd December 2003 to 27th December 2003." Clearly, the judgewas not ignorant of the arrangements being made. Interestingly, in the detailed itinerary drawn up by the commissionthere was no mention of the trips to Shirdi, Ajanta and Ellora.Meanwhile, arrangements for Justice Phukan's trip had already begunwith air headquarters sending the file to then joint secretary (air),Arvind Joshi. It is learnt that Joshi processed the file and soughtthe clearance of the then defence minister, George Fernandes. Between December 22 and December 27 (when they returned to Delhi), thecommission had only two days to actually see seven weapon systems ofthe 14 they were investigating. On December 22, they landed in Pune,and on December 23 left for Ahmednagar by an Mi-17 helicopter. OnDecember 24, the commission cancelled scheduled presentations totravel to Shirdi in a five-car convoy. The commission also spent thenext day, December 25, visiting Ajanta and Ellora. On December 26,they flew by an Mi-17 helicopter to Mumbai where they were put up atthe swank western naval command officer's mess. Eyebrows were also raised about trips made by another member of thecommission. Brojendra Prasad Katakey, then one of the senior counselwith the commission, travelled to London twice on government expense.First, he was sent to deliver the Tehelka tapes to London forverification. This was after Phukan reversed the ruling of hispredecessor, Justice G. Venkataswamy, that the tapes were genuine.Katakey travelled to London again, this time carrying the equipmentthe Tehelka portal had used for recording the events that led to theinquiry. Katakey, who was later appointed an additional judge of theGauhati High Court, was unavailable for comment. Through all this, the role of former defence minister George Fernandeshas also come up for scrutiny. It was he who cleared the tripsundertaken by the judge and members of the commission. While Fernandesremained unavailable for comment despite repeated efforts, JusticePhukan maintains that his wife had to travel with him, as she was notkeeping well. A stand that is at best surprising: if she was unwell,did it make sense to take her on a hectic trip that covered Pune,Ahmednagar, Shirdi, Ajanta and Ellora and finally Mumbai in five days?Only George Fernandes and Justice Phukan can answer that. With the credibility of the report—clearing Fernandes of any misdeedsduring Kargil—the commission had submitted to the NDA governmentunder question, there is a growing demand from Congress and Left MPsthat it be ignored. As for the NDA, it has decided to stay away fromParliament and maintain a stoic silence on the junket issue. _______________________________________________ Assam mailing list [email protected] http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam Mailing list FAQ: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/assam/assam-faq.html To unsubscribe or change options: http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam
