Saturday, Apr 09, 2005
Saturday, Apr 09, 2005 |
| Karnataka | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Karnataka
By Our Staff Reporter
BANGALORE, APRIL 8. The State Government on Friday placed before the Karnataka High Court certain records relating to the Bangalore Mysore Infrastructure Corridor (BMIC) project — the agenda and proceedings of the Cabinet meeting of March 17, 1997 and two letters by the Law Department and the Public Works Department (PWD). The Government action followed a direction by a Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice, Nauvdip Kumar Sodhi, and Justice B. Padmaraj, asking the Advocate-General, B.T. Parthasarathy, to place before it the Cabinet proceedings along with the annexures and agenda and the subsequent records in which the BMIC project was approved. The Bench was hearing a public interest litigation petition against the project by two MLCs — J.C. Madhuswamy from Chikanayakanahalli in Tumkur district and Srirama Reddy from Bagepalli in Kolar district — and S. Munnegowda, a resident of Sanjaynagar. The petitioners sought a Central Bureau of Investigation inquiry into the alleged irregularities in the acquisition of lands for the project.
`Records hidden'
When the matter came up today, the Bench took note of the affidavit by Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise (NICE) charging the Government with hiding certain records from the court, including letters by the Law Department and the PWD. These records, it claimed, clearly indicated that there was no need for it to sign the agreement by which a consortium of three companies had assigned the project to NICE. The photocopies of the letters were produced as annexures by NICE along with the affidavit. NICE claimed the records and letters prove that the Cabinet approved the project and that the Government was aware that the consortium had assigned the project to it. In another letter, the then PWD Secretary was asked to report back to the Government after executing the agreement. When this was so, how could the Chief Secretary file an affidavit on March 31 saying that NICE committed a fraud by failing to inform the Government that the consortium had handed over the project to it, the company asked. The Bench then directed Mr. Parthasarathy to place before it the original records before afternoon. It also directed the Government to place before it an authentic copy of the unstarred question on the project and the answer placed in the Legislative Council on March 28, 2005. The Advocate-General said it is difficult to produce the records as they are privileged documents. The Chief Justice wanted to know how the petitioners gained possession of some of the documents. "When they can get the documents, why can't the court have access to them," he asked.
No fraud: NICE
Earlier, NICE debunked the contention of the Government and the petitioners that it has committed a fraud. It said the Government defrauded and misrepresented itself on the issue by making false averments and going back on the agreement. The Bench adjourned the case till Monday and directed the petitioners to conclude their arguments by noon that day.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | The Hindu Images | Home |
Copyright © 2005, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
