Themes: Ethics in Business
Period : 1997-2001
Organization : Tata Tea, ULFA
Pub Date : 2002
Countries : India
Industry : Food & Beverages
Media reports claimed that Mahanta's decision to put an end to the Tata Tea case was because he had 'completed his revenge' by showing the tea industry the trouble he could put the companies through. Moreover, since the biggest segment of the Assam government's revenues came from taxes imposed on the tea industry, the former could not afford to be always at loggerheads with the latter.
An analyst said, "The determination of the state government to prosecute managers of the company for consorting with the enemy is sheer hypocrisy. With the Assam state government's writ barely extending beyond Guwahati and its compromised police and paramilitary forces unable to provide even minimal protection to the far-flung properties and personnel of tea companies, they had no option but to parley with militant organisations. |
|
Former West Bengal Chief Minister Jyoti Basu supported him, stating that no business house should pay insurgents to buy peace and that the tea companies in Assam should not have bypassed the state government. In July 2000, the operational chief of the counter-insurgency operations in Assam claimed that the ULFA had renewed its links with the tea industry.
Soon after, the manager of a tea-estate, belonging to the Williamson & Magor Group, along with two doctors, was arrested by the police for allegedly extending medical and financial aid to a senior ULFA leader. The arrest opened yet another round of debates over the tea industry-militant nexus.
In November 2000, terror returned to Assam's tea estates with the killing of J Basumatary, Assistant Manager of Fatemabad Tea Estate in Barpeta district.