Accounts submitted to the Supreme Court, at the insistence of the Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilisers, show that the sole trustee appointed by the Union Carbide Corporation (UCC), has admitted to transferring Rs 11.7 crore to England and to incurring ``administrative'' expenses of Rs 4.8 crore in just two years. The Union Government has ``contested'' this, stating in affidavit that the expenses should have been met by the UCC, in accordance with the 1994 order of the Supreme Court.

The activist groups have pointed out that while victims of the Bhopal gas tragedy got Rs 67,000 each from the Rs 705-crore settlement given by theUCC, Percival's daily expenses were to the tune of Rs 60,000. Says Indira Jaising, senior advocate for the activists, ``The embezzlement of funds by the sole trustee is a national scam. The funds must be brought back to India and the accounts scrutinised in accordance with our laws.''

Documents submitted to court show that just one day before his death on April 4, Percival nominated his son, Robert, a barrister, as a trustee.

But Robert Percival's bid to succession proved to be a difficult one. On May 25, instructions were issued to the State Bank of India (SBI), that the two accounts of the Trust operated by his father could now only be jointly operated by a co-signatory, a Joint Secretary in the Ministry. On September 4, Robert was given instructions that the remaining funds in London should immediately be remitted to India.

These developments have taken even as the building for the 290-bedded Bhopal hospital is nearing completion and after the Government has constituted an 11-member Bhopal MemorialHospital Trust, headed by former Chief Justice A M Ahmadi to oversee purchases and make appointments for it. Ian Percival had been made co-chairman of the new Trust and after his death, Robert Percival co-opted as a member.

When questioned about the money transfers and expenses incurred by his father, Percival told The Indian Express: ``These are just sidelines being pursued by small-minded people. The scale (of his expenses) should have been evident to people in India.'' He added: ``These allegations are an attempt to vilify my father's reputation and undermine the good work he has done.''

The scale of expenses has shocked persons privy to the accounts. After the sale of 1,65,84,750 UCIL shares in 1994, the proceeds totalling Rs 290.2 crore put in an escrow account in New Delhi. As sole trustee, Ian Percival had the authority to transfer funds from this account into that of the Bhopal Hospital Trust. At one stage, the Union Government had resisted the transfer of Rs 187 crore into the account andPercival had taken the matter to court. It now transpires that all such expenses -- including the lawyers' fees for litigation against the Government -- was coming not from the UCC but from the BHT funds.

Sources in the Ministry say their endeavor was to establish that the hefty ``administrative'' expenses shown in Percival's 1995-1996 accounts should have been picked up by the UCC. The locus standi for this was the October 20, 1994 Supreme Court order, after which Percival was allowed Rs 5 crore "administrative'' expenses. But the order had clarified, ``any expenditure other than those connected with or incidental to the sale of securities and the Hospital construction shall have to be borne by the Union Carbide Corporation.''

However, when the accounts of the Trust were submitted they revealed that Percival had charged ``fees'' totalling 1.7 cr in 1995 and Rs 1.9 cr in 1996. In addition, he had charged Rs 36 lakh and Rs 33 lakh as ``other professional'' charges for the two years. An explanatory notesent by Percival later stated the payments were for varied expenses such as office costs, staffing, secretarial work, heating, lighting, telephones, and accommodation.

Percival's statements reveal that at the end of January 1996, BHT's New Delhi account had a balance of Rs 342.3 crore. More importantly, they reveal that besides the Rs 5 crore transferred to England in 1994 (from where all these expenses were met), Percival made two more transfers to England, one for Rs 5 crore for further ``administrative'' expenses and another of Rs 1.7 crore for ``investments.''

SBI balance sheets now with the Ministry show the second Rs 5-crore transfer and Robert Percival told The Indian Express that the money was taken to England sometime in December 1997. But a top official of the Ministry says, ``Percival did not inform the Supreme Court or the Ministry about the transfers. Then how did he take the money out? It is shocking that more than Rs 10 crore should have been spent by him from the hospitalfunds.''

Robert Percival said that it was surprising that the Government had begun to question the veracity of the expenses, a year after they had submitted the accounts. ``Initially the Government had taken a neutral stance in the matter. Lately, they seem to be a little more aligned with the viewpoint of the activists,'' he admitted.