Civic body need not repay Rs 473cr

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad,Dec 28: The AP High Court on Thursday granted a big relief to the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority, relieving it of the need to refund Rs 473 crore to the bidders of the Golden Mile Project.

The HMDA had auctioned 70 acres in Kokapet village in July 2006.The auction fetched Rs 703 crore, including a bid of Rs 14.5 crore per acre for a five-acre plot. The bidders paid `435 crore upfront. Many reputed names were involved in the bidding. But, when there was a delay in handing over the property to them, the bidders approached the court, contending that they were not informed that there were writs pending with regard to the land.

K.S.B. Ali and others, who claim to be legal heirs of Nawab Nusrat Jung-I, have been fighting for the land for several years and had filed the writs.

A single judge bench directed HMDA in April 2010 to refund the deposits to the petitioners within three months. If it fails to repay, it will have to pay nine per cent interest per annum from the date of deposit till the date of payment.

HMDA went into appeal. Advocate-General A. Sudarshan Reddy contended that the writ petitions were filed at a subsequent stage and this information was passed on to the petitioners at the time of the auction.

The petitioners participated in the auction, being fully aware of the pending litigation, and they are deemed to have waived the objections, in this regard.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice P.C. Ghose and Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar allowed the writ appeal of HMDA, holding that the writ petitions are not maintainable.

Jagan case: Directive to CBI

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 20: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Wednesday directed the CBI to place the police custody and remand reports regarding the arrest of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy before it on Thursday.

Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy was hearing Reddy’s statutory bail application, while Additional Solicitor General Haren P. Raval was representing the CBI.

The judge said that he will give his decision on Thursday.

The CBI counsel faced a tough time as the judge posed several questions to him regarding the arrest of the Kadapa MP and YSRC chief, the prime accused in an illegal investments case.

The judge asked the CBI whether the accused was arrested only regarding the Vanpic case or in connection with all the other cases registered against him.

CBI counsel Raval said that the arrest was in the Vanpic case alone and not in the seven other cases, and that there was no question of bail on those issues.

The judge asked whether the CBI had assured the SC that it would complete the investigation in three months and that it be over by Januray second week.

The CBI counsel replied that Mohan Parasaran, another solicitor-general, appeared at the Supreme Court to argue on the bail petition of Jagan. He submitted before SC that the CBI is investigating expeditiously and assured that the probe will be completed without delay. Parasaran had also said that that a final chargesheet will be filed after completion of the investigation.

Based on Parasaran’s submission, the Supreme Court said that it was not inclined to interfere in the matter at this stage and accordingly dismissed the bail plea of Jagan on October 5, Raval added. Then the judge enquired whether the accused had filed the SLP before completion of 90 days of arrest and directed the CBI and the counsel for Jagan to file affidavits on the issue.

The judge also asked the CBI to place before the court the counter affidavits filed before the Supreme Court.

Raval urged the court not to grant bail to the accused as the investigation is at a very crucial stage and the petitioner, being politically and economically influential, would impede the probe.

ED told not to attach MSat assets

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 12: The AP High Court on Tuesday granted relief to Mahindra Satyam by staying an order passed by the adjudicating authority of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) attaching Rs 822 crore of immovable property of the company.

Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar passed an interim order on the plea of Satyam Computer Services Ltd (Mahindra Satyam) challenging the order.

The ED had issued the provisional attachment order on October 18, 2012, after it had concluded that Rs 822 crore lying with various banks were proceeds from illegalities allegedly committed by Satyam founder B. Ramalinga Raju. The ED had issued a notice to Mahindra Satyam by attaching the assets on October 29.

On Tuesday, Justice Kumar said, “On the basis of the CBI chargesheets (filed in 2009) the authority formed an opinion with regards to conditions of Sections 5(1)(a) and (b) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 being fulfilled. However, fulfilment of the conditions prescribed in Section 5(1)(c) of the Act of 2002 is not manifest.”

Citing flaws in the order, the judge held that the authorities had improperly exercised their power.

ED draws flak for Satyam attachment

Finding fault with the Enforcement Directorate’s attachment order, Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar said, “Except for badly reproducing the language of Section 5(1)(c) of the Act in the provisional attachment order, the authority has failed to detail as to what reasons he had to believe that the new management of the company, which was brought into the picture after a laborious exercise by none other than the Government of India itself, would either conceal, transfer or deal in any manner with the alleged proceeds of crime which may result in frustrating any proceeding under the Act.”

Referring to an earlier order of a Division Bench of the AP High Court, of which he was a member, Justice Kumar said that the power of provisional attachment was a very drastic one which had to be exercised sparingly and in exceptional circumstances, as provisional attachment of properties of a commercial entity could have far reaching consequences affecting the reputation and liquidity of the enterprise.

Citing various flaws in the attachment order, the judge held that the authorities in the current case had exercised power and jurisdiction under Sections 5(1) and 8(1) of the Act without proper application of mind and without having “reason to believe” as mandated by the statute.

The judge observed that the notice dated October 29, did not even reflect that the Adjudicating Authority had found “reason to believe” that an offence under Section 3 of the Act was established or that the petitioner company was in possession of the proceeds of crime.

The judge ruled that the provisional attachment order and the consequential notice of the Adjudicating Authority were found to be in flagrant disregard of the legal provisions and could not therefore be permitted to operate pending disposal of this petition.

HC stays FSA for first quarter of 2010

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Dec 5: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Tuesday granted a stay order on collection of Fuel Surcharge Adjustment (FSA) for the first quarter of 2010-11 by power distribution companies from consumers.

The interim order will come as a breather to domestic consumers as the discoms had already initiated steps to recover Fuel Surcharge for the financial year 2010-11.
Justice R. Subhash Reddy was dealing with a batch of petitions by consumers challenging the orders of the AP Electricity Regulatory Commission permitting power distribution companies to levy FSA for 2010-11 and 2011-12.

The petitioners argued that the commission had granted orders in favour of the discoms to recover FSA from consumers in spite of their applications being filed beyond the stipulated time of 30 days of every quarter in a year.

Though the judge agreed with the argument for the year 2010-11, he was not inclined to consider the above contention for the year 2011-12 at this stage.

He made it clear that the interim order would be applicable for the FSA with regard to the first quarter of the 2010-11 and the FSA for the remaining quarters would be dealt with later.

He also said that if any consumers had already paid the FSA for the first quarter of 2010-11, those payments would be subjected to the final orders of the petitions.

The four discoms in AP are already reeling under a financial crisis. At the same time, the FSA claims amount, already been spent on by the discoms over the last three years, is now unrecoverable till another ruling is passed in their favour by the Supreme Court.