New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Aug 03, 2020-Monday
-°C

Humidity
-

Wind
-

Select Country
Select city
ADVERTISEMENT
Home / Chandigarh / Waste processing plant row: Court allows contempt plea by Jaypee Group, directs Chandigarh MC to file reply

Waste processing plant row: Court allows contempt plea by Jaypee Group, directs Chandigarh MC to file reply

The matter will be heard on August 19.

chandigarh Updated: Jul 12, 2020 00:02 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
Hindustan Times, Chandigarh
Hindustantimes

The district court has upheld the application moved by Jaypee Group against Chandigarh municipal corporation for taking possession of the Dadu Majra waste processing plant despite a stay order, and has further stated that “proceedings can be initiated” if the order is proved to be violated.

The court of additional district and sessions judge Vijay Singh has directed Jaiprakash Associates Limited and Chandigarh MC to file their replies so that the court could ascertain “whether respondent (MC) has taken the possession of the plant forcibly and illegally by violating the order dated June 19 wilfully and deliberately” and if so, what were the effects of it.

The matter will be heard on August 19.

The Jaypee Group had been running the garbage processing plant at Dadu Majra till its contract was terminated by the MC on March 5 and sought possession within seven days. After the group had moved the court challenging the termination notice, on March 12, the court had granted some relief to Jaypee Group by staying MC’s notice for three months.

Later on June 19, the court had allowed another application and extended the stay for one month. The MC was informed about the court order regarding extension of stay telephonically and by email, but despite that the civic body had forcibly taken possession of the plant, the Jaypee group mentioned.

The court was also informed that on June 25, the high court had passed an order that “the possession shall be maintained as it exists on the date of passing of the order till the decision on the application under Section 17 of the Act”.

The HC had also directed that a sole arbitrator be appointed to resolve the dispute between the parties and the Arbitral Tribunal on June 30 had said that arguments shall be heard on August 22.

The district court directed both parties to submit their list of evidence and witnesses so that the issue could be decided.

ht epaper

Sign In to continue reading