HOT TOPICS

SPOTLIGHT AGENCIES

BMIC Updates - II

0

Written By tsubba - 8 March, 2008

BMIC Bangalore Infrastructure Media Reports

BMIC project updates -II

Also see: BMIC track

Three Contempt Peitions
Saturday, Mar 08, 2008, The Hindu & Deccan Herald
The HC Division Bench headed by Justice V G Sabhahit gave a long hearing for the three contempt of court complaints filed with regard to implementation of BMIC project on March 7, 2008.

Case#1
Pramod Layout Citizens Welfare Association against State government and NICE.
* NICE has altered the alignment of a Link Road to ensure that it overlaps several areas of the layout.
* Due to illegal changes in alignment, lands in Pantharapalya have been acquired.
* State government & NICE have violated the HC & SC orders directing BMIC project’s implementation according to original framework agreement.
Bench heard the arguments on both sides and reserved its orders on the question of maintainability of the petition.

Case#2
V Nagaraj of Dalit Sangharsha Samiti (DSS) along with an NGO Aparna-Citizens Service Forum against State government, NICE, KSPCB and others.
* Contempt of court by violating SC and HC judgements and violating the conditions in the framework agreement
* Illegal deviations in alignments in Gottigere and Rajarajeshwari layout

The counsel for petitioners said the directions given by the High Court on the project in the Somashekara Reddy case (a PIL against the project which was dismissed) were being systematically violated. Lands in excess of what was required for the project was sought to be given to NICE, he said.

NICE refuted the allegations and said all these charges had been adjudicated by the High Court and Supreme Court when writ petitions were filed against the project. It said there was no contempt and urged the court to dismiss the petition.

The Bench then sought to know from the Government its stand on the contempt. The Government said the framework agreement was in 1998 and if a contempt petition had to be filed, it should be done as per Section 20 of the Contempt of Court Act within a year.

The Bench then posted the case for Monday, March 10, 2008.

Case#3
Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) against NICE
* Going ahead with the project although the KSPCB Appellate Authority had passed an interim order(2007) directing the parties — KSPCB and NICE — to maintain status quo.

Counsel for KPSB submitted that the KSPCB had asked NICE not to go ahead with the project after it detected certain deviations. The matter then came up before the High Court which had remitted the matter back to the KSPCB Appellate Authority. Although the authority had passed orders, NICE disobeyed it and continued with the construction of the project.

The counsel for NICE said the authority was not a court and that there would not be any contempt if its order was disobeyed. The authority had not passed any interim order. Besides, a Division Bench order of the High Court continued and the company had gone ahead with the project because of it.

The State Government submitted to the bench that contempt of court proceedings against NICE is not maintainable. The bench heard the arguments on both sides and reserved its orders on the question of maintainability of the petition.

Other cases & protests

NICE acquisition challenged
Saturday, Feb 23, 2008, The Hindu
Two residents of Bangalore are among the four who have challenged the acquisition of their lands by the State Government for the BMIC project. The petitioners said the acquisition proceedings are flawed and illegal.Justice Ravi Malimath adjourned further hearing of the case.

Farmers protest against NICE
Wednesday, Feb 13, 2008, The Hindu
Farmers affected by the BMIC project being implemented by the NICE took out a procession in the city seeking
return of additional land acquired for the project.

The farmers under Raitha Hitarakshana Horata Samithi, who came from the project areas including Ramanagara, Chennapatna, Bangalore North and South taluks, demanded that a plot measuring 2,400 sq. ft. should be given every acre of land that has been acquired from the farmers. “Compensation should be raised since the market value of land had increased enormously from the time of acquisition of land,” he added.

Samiti president Panchalingaiah told The Hindu that they were also demanding a service road to connect villages falling on either side of the expressway since transportation of goods between the villages had become a problem.
Further, he said that excess land acquired by the KIADB for the project should be returned to the farmers. Later, they submitted a memorandum to the Governor.

And then there is Gowdru
I tried to a take a crack at this, but it is too dense, after all Gowdru is no joke. I reverence, posting it in full.

Annul accord with NICE, Gowda urges Governor
Sunday, Feb 24, 2008, The Hindu

H.D. Deve Gowda has called upon Karnataka Governor Rameshwar Thakur to immediately annul the agreement with the NICE, which, he says, is “dodging” the execution of the Bangalore-Mysore expressway project as per Supreme Court directions.

Mr. Gowda told The Hindu here that the government should apprise courts of all facts. The memorandum of understanding for the project was signed about 13 years ago.

He said the Karnataka government had written to NICE on four occasions in recent times (when the H.D. Kumaraswamy government was in power), asking it to execute and complete the long-pending project. However, the company “is keen only to obtain nearly 2,400 acres of prime land, adjoining the proposed expressway on the outskirts of Bangalore, worth around Rs. 30,000 crore. Since the company has not evinced interest in the completion of the project, it would be in the fitness of things for the government to cancel the agreement.”

Letters to Governor
Mr. Gowda has also written four letters to the Governor in recent weeks. “The Governor, however, is yet to acknowledge the receipt of my letters, leave alone convey to me the action taken.

Given the nature of the interest shown by the company in executing the project, the agreement should be cancelled forthwith since any dispute will mean arbitration in London as per the conditions laid down in the agreement. The company can complete phase one of the three-phase project and thereafter drag the government to London.”

Mr. Gowda said an additional affidavit before the Supreme Court would enable the government to get the stay vacated and proceed with the completion of the expressway. After the Kumaraswamy government invited global tenders, NICE challenged the matter and obtained a stay.

“Now that the present dispensation itself has filed an affidavit in the [Karnataka] High Court and stated that NICE is not really interested in completing the project as per the Supreme Court directions, the same exercise should be repeated in the Supreme Court.”

In the affidavit filed (in reply to a contempt petition) here on February 4, the Karnataka government highlighted NICE’s reluctance to complete the project despite its extending all support to the company.

The Kumaraswamy government, in accordance with the directions of the High Court and the Supreme Court, had sought to restrict the execution of the project conforming to the original framework.


COMMENTS

confidential

tsubba - 12 March, 2008 - 03:07

sss. that is the crux of all the "drum beating" in this case. there is no transparency. by a contractual clause the OFW and its revision are confidential. nobody really knows what is in it. following all the court rulings, it is not clear if even the 'courts' know what is going on. though every one and their granmother is suing everyone and the kitchen sink for not sticking to the OFW. there is supposed to be an english version of the environmental clearance for the project, but i have not ever seen it, and not for lack of trying. in any case, the real cream is not in the revions of OFW but in the 'notes'. for a project of this size and scope you would magine they know the requirements to two decimal points, but no the entire project seems to be going on as if it were an illegal bylaw violating project executed by your neighbourhood mestry. if you find out something do let us know. honestly interested. perhaps ESG, Bangalore is a source.

yet another OFW related WP

tsubba - 14 March, 2008 - 14:40

KIADB notification: HC asks State to file response http://www.hindu.com/2008/03/14/stories/2008031455470800.htm BANGALORE: The Karnataka High Court has asked the State Government to file its response to a petition by two residents of Gottigere Lake challenging a notification by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) acquiring their lands for the construction of the Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP). The petitioners, J.B. Suhail and J.B. Arif, residents of Gottigere in Uttarahalli, Bangalore South, said their lands were sought to be acquired by the KIADB for the construction of a peripheral road as part of the BMICP. They said their lands were not notified for acquisition when the original framework agreement was signed between Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise (NICE), which is executing the BMICP, and the State. However, the alignment was changed subsequently and their lands were notified under Section 3 (1) of the KIADB Act, 1961, for acquisition. They said on January 29, 2003 the KIADB issued a notification seeking to acquire their lands. They urged the court to stay the notification and direct the respondents not to interfere with the possession of their lands. Justice Ashok Hinchigeri asked the State to file its response and adjourned further hearing on the case.

updates to the OFW related case

tsubba - 21 March, 2008 - 11:23


NICE, State to maintain status quo on alignment at Gottigere lake
The Hindu

The State Government on Wednesday informed the Karnataka High Court that though it had addressed three letters to NICE asking it to furnish the alignment design of the peripheral road at Gottigere lake, the company had not replied so far.

The Government made the submission in response to writ petitions by two residents of Gottigere — J.B. Suhail and J.B. Arif — who had challenged the acquisition of their lands for the BMIC project.

The petitioners said their lands were no longer required as the alignment of the peripheral road at Gottigere lake had been changed.

They said their lands were not notified for acquisition when the original framework agreement was signed between NICE, which is executing the project, and the State. However, the alignment was changed subsequently and their lands were notified for acquisition.

They said on January 29, 2003, KIADB issued a notification seeking to acquire their lands.

Opposing the petitions, the State said as per the Supreme Court decision and the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, lands once acquired by the State could not be given back to the owner. It said the lands were acquired by the KIADB for the project. It had addressed three letters to NICE asking it to furnish the final design of the road. But, NICE had so far not responded to the letters.

NICE said it had challenged the change of alignment and a decision was awaited.

Justice Ashok Hinchigeri asked both parties to maintain status quo on the Gottigere lake and adjourned further hearing on the case.

The issue of final design keeps cropping up.
I wonder why the final land requirements cannot be made public by NICE.

If everything were normal then land-once-acquired-cannot-be-returned makes sense. But in this project, there is the land that the state has acquired for the project and then there is the land that NICE is building on. ondakond sambanda ne illa. how fair is to for the residents then?


RTI ?

pbatny - 22 March, 2008 - 12:48

Wondering why no one has filed an RTI with KIADB or GOK to get access the OFW and related "notes" and ammedments. ? There is every attempt is made by either parties to cover up wrong doings.

Prasad

agreements

sss - 11 March, 2008 - 17:27

Can some one make a copy of the two agreements available to me. I need it for further research in this direction...(i am studying the project from PPP formation perspective)

PRAJA.IN COMMENT GUIDELINES

Posting Guidelines apply for comments as well. No foul language, hate mongering or personal attacks. If criticizing third person or an authority, you must be fact based, as constructive as possible, and use gentle words. Avoid going off-topic no matter how nice your comment is. Moderators reserve the right to either edit or simply delete comments that don't meet these guidelines. If you are nice enough to realize you violated the guidelines, please save Moderators some time by editing and fixing yourself. Thanks!