Results 1 to 3 of 3
01-19-2010, 06:53 PM #1NιѕнyGuest
Farmers force deferment of hearing on RPL's appeal in Dadri case
[DOWN]NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court was on Monday virtually forced by some farmers to adjourn hearing on Anil Ambani group controlled Reliance Power Ltd's plea challenging an Allahabad High Court judgment questioning the mode and manner of land acquisition by the UP government for the mega power plant at Dadri.
The persistent argument of counsel M L Sharma was that though his client farmers were petitioners before the HC and had filed caveat to prevent RPL from obtaining any ex-parte orders from the SC, he had not been supplied a copy of the RPL petition leaving him unprepared to defend the correctness of the HC judgment.
When a Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran and Deepak Verma agreed to defer the hearing till January 29, RPL's counsel Mukul Rohatgi shifted out of the legal track and let go a few barbs at Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL).
Referring to the major differences and litigation between the brothers over the supply of gas from Mukesh's KG Basin to the Dadri plant, Rohatgi said the farmers were being set up against the younger brother by the elder one.
He said of the 5,827 farmers whose land was acquired, only 432 have challenged the land acquisition and the rest have all taken the compensation money and have no grievance. "If that is the position, how could the HC on the basis of petitions by 432, 90% of whom have taken compensation, reopen the entire case four long years after the land acquisition award was made," he asked.
The petitioners, the so-called poor farmers, used to charter a private aircraft to take their counsel from Delhi to Allahabad for every hearing before the high court and it was obvious that they have been funded by RIL, he alleged.
"Though this fact has nothing to do with the case, I am constrainted to say that the corporate rivalry over over gas supply has extended to this case too," Rohatgi added. But, it was counsel Sharma who went out happily having been able to stall RPL's attempt to get any immediate interim relief, for which Anil's firm has to argue afresh on January 29.
RPL had questioned the HC judgment saying the adverse order so late in the day was unnecessary as the land acquisitions were done at considerable cost and by scrupulously following the legal parameters in 2005.
"Petitioner has already incurred a significant cost on the project undertaking basic engineering, obtained all necessary clearances and approvals, commenced construction of the project on the said land and more than 90% of the original land owners had taken compensation (including all writ petitioners) in the year 2005 under voluntarily signed agreements under UP local laws," RPL said.
It said that though only 432 of the 5,827 original land owners had filed the writ petitions, the HC interfered with the land acquisitions granting a general relief for all land owners, despite an overwhelming majority not having any grievance and voluntarily accepting the compensation[/DOWN]
01-20-2010, 12:16 AM #2
01-20-2010, 12:20 AM #3NιѕнyGuest
thank u ahmed