All India Football Federation (AIFF) President Kalyan Chaubey has served a legal notice to the organisation’s former principal legal advisor Nilanjan Bhattacharjee for making serious “corruption allegations” against him.
On Saturday, Bhattacharjee, in a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, claimed Chaubey worked out “corruption avenues” through non-transparent tender process and preferential allotment of tender.
He had also alleged that Chaubey made attempts to “siphon off money from the federation’s exchequer” and used AIFF fund for personal expenses.
Chaubey, who had earlier termed the allegations “baseless”, said Bhattacharjee’s actions were aimed at damaging his reputation.
“The motive and agenda in tarnishing my image and reputation are visible and obvious. I have sent him a legal notice with respect to his defamation and attempts at character assassination, and will be pursuing this matter to its logical conclusion,” Chaubey said in the letter addressed to all the state units and the executive committee members.
“While I respond personally, it is also my duty to protect the reputation of the AIFF in the face of these attempts to weaken the institution through allegations made against me.” Chaubey’s letter assumes significance as the AIFF will be holding its Annual General Body Meeting (AGM) in Itanagar, Arunachal Pradesh on March 10.
Chaubey gave a point-by-point rebuttal to the allegations made by Bhattacharjee.
Bhattacharjee, whose services were terminated by the AIFF after he made the allegations, had alleged that “through coercion, numerous tenders such as broadcasting of I-League (last season), IWL, Santosh Trophy were allotted in favour of one company which happens to be close to the incumbent president.” On this, Chaubey said, “Bhattacharjee was part of the tender selection committee and not once did he raise a query on the tender selection and award process.” He said the I-League production company was finalised after a joint technical evaluation between the AIFF and FSDL (the marketing partner of the AIFF).
“It would be pertinent to request a report from FSDL on the technical evaluation process and as to why (the broadcasting company) was chosen. We will put these documents to the AGM and clarify and explain any questions.” Chaubey also termed Bhattacharjee’s allegations that he used AIFF fund for his personal trips and hotel stays as “baseless” and “motivated”.
“The President AIFF is entitled to travel by Business Class but almost every single time I have travelled by Economy Class. The President AIFF is entitled to stay in suite rooms but almost every single time I have stayed in standard rooms.
“The President AIFF is entitled to receive per diem INR 10,000/- during travel/ meeting. To date, I have never claimed a single rupee.” He also termed the allegations made earlier by some individuals that he used the official AIFF credit card to buy personal items as “ridiculous” and an attempt to show him in poor light.
“I have asked the office to carry statements of the AIFF credit card to the AGM and you are all welcome to peruse them (during the AGM).
“I have asked our internal auditors Deloitte to be present in the EC meeting/AGM. They will be happy to address any queries regarding the financial management of AIFF and to allay any doubts,” Chaubey stated.
Bhattacharjee had said that he, as principal legal advisor of the AIFF, had refused to sign a “lopsided” agreement with airline company Indigo where “a minimum guarantee of Rs 7 crore was to be given, content creation rights (were to be) provided”, besides promising tickets and merchandise “against no incentive to Indian football”.
Replying to this allegation, Chaubey said: “The idea of the partnership with IndiGo was that of barter, to promote Indian football through Indigo’s various mediums (like outdoor hoardings, in-flight magazines, social media, videos, images) and vice-versa.
“A general corporate 10% discount on all tickets we purchased was a part of the proposition.
“…there is no potential financial implication or possibly loss to AIFF from the arrangement and any allegations in that respect are totally unfounded and fictitious. The terms have also been approved by FSDL and there is no situation in which either AIFF or FSDL would approve a deal that causes loss rather than benefit to AIFF.”
Comments
0 comment