Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Mar 10, 2005

About Us
Contact Us
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 Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

NICE misrepresented facts, say petitioners

By Our Staff Reporter

BANGALORE, MARCH 9. The hearing on a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking a stay on all operations of the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP) continued on Wednesday with the petitioners urging the Karnataka High Court to step in and set right the anomalies.

On March 3, the State Government said it was keen on the continuation of the project but not in the manner envisaged by Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise (NICE) which is executing it.

When the hearing resumed today, the advocate for the petitioners, G.L. Sanghi, told a Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice, Nauvdip Kumar Sodhi, and Justice B. Padmaraj that NICE had committed a fraud on both the Government and the courts by misrepresenting facts.

The Bench was hearing the petition seeking a stay on all operations of the project and a direction to NICE not to create any further third-party rights on private and Government lands acquired for the project pending disposal of the petition.

The petition has been filed by two MLAs — J.C. Madhuswamy from Chikanayakanahali in Tumkur district, and Srirama Reddy from Bagepali in Kolar district — and S. Munnegowda, a resident of Sanjaynagar.

The petitioners alleged that there had been large-scale illegalities in the acquisition of lands for the project. Lands that did not fall within the project area had either been acquired or notified.

`Pact with consortium'

They said the Government had entered into an agreement with a U.S-led consortium for the project. The U.S. company, VSB, was a signatory to both the framework agreement and the memorandum of understanding. Though the consortium had prepared and submitted a project report in 1995, it had not figured in the subsequent events.

They alleged that NICE had not been established by the consortium but belonged to a family whose members were on its board of directors. They said the Government was unaware that it was not a signatory to a document in which the consortium had purportedly assigned the rights of the project to NICE.

When the Bench expressed surprise that the fact had come out only now, the Advocate-General, B.T. Parthasarthy, said some facts had come out recently. "Some of the facts are a shock to me," he said.

The petitioners said the Government had given its lands on lease to NICE which, in turn, had assigned them to Nandi Economic Corridor Enterprise (NECE). It was NECE which mortgaged the lands to a bank for Rs. 150 crores.

They said they were for the continuation of the project provided the excess lands were returned and the arbitration clause in London was dropped. They said both the acquisition of excess lands and the arbitration clause had been arrived at by NICE by misrepresenting facts and, hence, they ought to be set aside.

A former Secretary of the Public Works Department, they alleged, had colluded with NICE in notifying and acquiring large tracts of land in and around Bangalore not needed for the project. These lands were today worth crores of rupees and NICE was acting like a real estate agency in marketing them.

`Ruling violated'

They said NICE had violated an earlier Division Bench ruling by proposing to construct a road across Gottigere Lake. This would cut off the water supply to the lake and was contrary to the court ruling.

The Bench asked the petitioners if it would not be better if the dispute was resolved through arbitration as all the parties were disputing some parts of the agreement. The petitioners said if the dispute was taken to the arbitrator, they would have no say as only the Government and NICE could be the parties. They said the PIL petition was filed as they had no other avenue to redress their grievances.

The Bench adjourned further hearing on the case to Thursday after the petitioners completed their arguments.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Karnataka

News: Front Page | National | Tamil Nadu | Andhra Pradesh | Karnataka | Kerala | New Delhi | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous | Engagements |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Updates: Breaking News |


News Update


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