Imphal, January 14: Appreciating the press statement of the proscribed RPF hailing the stand of the UNLF to let the Imphal Urban Cooperative Bank function without any anomaly or corrupt practices which is in line with its (RPF's) objective, the banned UNLF, however, conveyed its displeasure at the failure of the two outfits to work together despite having similar objectives due to selfish motives.

A statement issued by UNLF's Senior Publicity Officer Ksh Yoiheiba clarified that it never disbanded the nine directors of the IUCB's Board of Directors elected on June 10, 2004.Even as the Board president Gourakishore and some other directors failed to pay back loan amounts within the agreed period of time, they were given extended time to repay the loan amounts and at the same time they were allowed to remain in the Board.

Out of these, the loan taken by Gourakishore's younger brother with his guarantee has not bee paid back till date.

As such there was no case of the UNLF committing any mistake nor confessed any misdeed.

What UNLF stated was dissolution of the Board of Directors (BOD) and constitution of the Board of Administrators (BOA) by the relevant authority (Registrar of Cooperative Societies) following rampant irregular activities detrimental to the interest of the bank, clarified Yoiheiba.

Regarding the retirement order given to general manager K Lukhoi by BOD president Gourakishore, Yoiheiba said that the Board was already dissolved by the State Government after an investigation by an enquiry constituted by the RCS (Registrar of Cooperative Societies).

After the Board meeting held on February 17, 2006 had decided to take March 1, 1948 as Lukhoi's official date of birth, Gourakishore issued the retirement order of Lukhoi on February 22, 2006 .

Here the BOD committed an error.

According to bye-laws of the bank, should the BOD take against the GM, necessary approval of the RCS Manipur should be sought first.

This same bye-law was violated by the then BOD, pointed Yoiheiba.

But, as the Board had an intention to remove Lukhoi from his post in the interest of some individuals, the Board decided to give retirement to Lukhoi somehow even at the cost of violating the bank's bye-laws.

It was under these circumstances that the Board president Gourakishore issued the faulty office order.

Then the RCS Manipur made specific instructions to halt all illegal actions being taken up by the BOD against K Lukhoi, mentioned the UNLF.

The outfit also asked the BOD to withdraw its false decision adopted wrongly by exercising power beyond the established acts and rules of the bank.

Subsequently, the decision adopted illegally was made to withdraw in another meeting of the Board.

As regards the date of birth of Lukhoi, the BOD was asked to make necessary steps through relevant authority in proper official channel but not to act forcibly in the vested interest of some individuals.

In other words, the Board was asked to withdraw its decision adopted illegally.

Here, the relevant authority of the RPF should bear in mind the poser whether it can be termed a justice to run the bank according to one's whim by using force in a manner befitting the conduct of a gang, asserted Yoiheiba.

On the other hand, the RPF is unable to view the initiative of the UNLF to check illegal and irregular activities in the bank and to ensure compliance of established acts and rules in its right perspectives, noted Yoiheiba.

The act of preventing illegal activities of the BOD and subsequent corrective initiatives taken by the outfit is UNLF's revolutionary justice, he stated while adding that the same initiative is for development of the bank and benefit of the people.

Reacting to the statement of the RPF's spokesperson in which he named some cadres of the UNLF, Yoiheiba questioned the intention of the spokesperson.

"Wouldn't it expose that some directors of the bank have been given PLA's service number if he is responded in the same manner", asserted Yoiheiba.

The most outstanding issue plaguing the bank at present, is the case of withdrawing and using a large amount of money by some directors in collusion with the AGM without the knowledge of the DGM and the GM.

Yoiheiba supported his contention by citing the cases of purchasing two ATMs by expending more than Rs 15 lakhs without approval of the RBI and without making necessary arrangements to install the ATMs, and the bank's building which remains incomplete after a large amount had been withdrawn for the same purpose.

The crisis in the bank has been deepened by the official order issued after lobbying by some directors of the suspended Board like Chandrasekhar to the Minister concerned to join the BOA so as to continue their corrupt activities in the bank, observed Yoiheiba.

However, contending that the official order was illegal, the EA filed a case in Court which upheld their contention and stayed the official order thereby preventing the directors from joining the BOA.

The crisis was further aggravated following the RPF resorting to force against the EA to withdraw the case with the intention to allow the same Directors join the BOA, asserted Yoiheiba.

Reacting to Chandrasekhar's statement that he is innocent, Yoiheiba rubbished the claim contending that he was present in all the Board meetings as a director in which many faulty and illegal decisions were adopted and put into practice.

For he never raised any objection to the decisions of the Board nor gave up his post, he cannot claim innocence, he noted.

Unlike the RPF, the UNLF do not make any attempt to put some of its favoured men in the IUCB's BOA/BOD forcibly.

The UNLF's stand is clear and simple––no tainted men involved in corrupt and irregular practices should be allowed to join the bank's BOA/BOD or participate in its management affairs, concluded Yoiheiba.

Comment