Advertisement

HindustanTimes Sat,20 Sep 2014

Tata plea on Singur Act referred to CJ

PTI  Kolkata, November 01, 2011
First Published: 19:51 IST(1/11/2011) | Last Updated: 19:56 IST(1/11/2011)

A division bench of the Calcutta High Court today referred to the Chief Justice an appeal by Tata Motors challenging an earlier order validating the Singur Act after the state questioned whether it had the jurisdiction to hear the case.

Advertisement

Appearing for West Bengal government's industries department, senior counsel Kalyan Banerjee claimed before the division bench comprising Justice K J Sengupta and Justice Joymalya Bagchi that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the case.

Banerjee said the appeal challenging the validity of the Singur Land Rehabilitation and Development Act 2011 should be heard by another bench presided by Justice P C Ghosh as such matters relating to challenge of validity of an Act were under his jurisdiction.

Appearing for Tata Motors Ltd, barrister S Pal submitted the bench headed by Justice Sengupta had concurrent jurisdiction and could hear the appeal like all other appeals and as such there was no question of lack of jurisdiction.

After hearing both the parties, the bench decided to refer the matter to Chief Justice J N Patel to clarify whether it had jurisdiction or not to hear the matter. TML has challenged the order of Justice I P Mukerji, who had upheld the constitutionality of Singur Land Rehabilitation and Development Act, 2011, by which West Bengal government vested the land leased to the company at Singur.

The court had, after passing the order on September 28, given an unconditional stay of the judgement till November two to allow any aggrieved party to file an appeal. Tata Motors, which was to set up its Nano car plant at Singur, had moved to Sanand in Gujarat in 2008 citing a law and order problem.


Advertisement
more from Kolkata

Another Viswabharati student files complaint

A third-year student of fine arts section complained to the police against her departmental head for threatening her for taking part in an agitation showing solidarity with the victim.
Advertisement
Most Popular
Advertisement
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 HT Media Limited. All Rights Reserved