‘Running on gensets for 2 years': Mohali bus terminal developer hits out at GMADA
'There is no stay in their favour. If we default, the concession agreement provides for termination—why stop us from even starting?' Mahakram's counsel Amit Jhanji submitted, seeking a direction to GMADA and Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) to restore supply and let the project operate.
GMADA, for its part, has pressed the High Court for urgent intervention against what it calls a 'dangerous dilution' of safeguards meant to protect public safety in large infrastructure projects. Its writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenges the application of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, to the public-private partnership it originally awarded in 2009, arguing that the IBC framework allows new developers to take over without meeting the stringent technical norms embedded in the concession agreement.
The authority wants the High Court to set aside the National Company Law Tribunal's (NCLT) October 2023 approval of Mahakram's plan and remand the case for a technical re-evaluation of bidders, insisting that the IBC's financial creditor–centric process sidelined GMADA's statutory mandate and allowed entities 'disqualified at the tender stage' to control a critical public asset.
The integrated bus terminal and commercial hub was awarded to C&C Towers Limited through a two-stage tender requiring bidders to have executed similar ₹50 crore projects. C&C defaulted on milestones, and GMADA moved to terminate the contract. However, insolvency proceedings admitted by the NCLT in September 2019 triggered a moratorium under the IBC, halting GMADA's action. Classified merely as an 'operational creditor,' the statutory authority lost its vote in the Committee of Creditors (CoC) despite owning the land.
In January 2020, the Resolution Professional issued an Expression of Interest cutting the net worth requirement for resolution applicants to ₹25 crore and dropping sector-specific experience altogether. Mahakram Developers' plan was later cleared by the CoC and approved by the NCLT in 2023, prompting GMADA's challenge.
Appearing before Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, Mahakram's counsel stressed that all obligations and penalties are contained in the concession agreement. 'If we fail, terminate our concession—but don't paralyse the project. For two years, the bus stand has run on generators, imposing unnecessary costs,' he said.
GMADA countered that its NCLAT appeal against the NCLT approval was pending and sought liberty to raise fresh statutory and constitutional grounds, including alleged conflicts between the IBC's overriding effect and the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995.
The bench questioned GMADA's justification for blocking operations without an interim stay. 'Your objections to the resolution plan were dismissed in 2023. Grounds not raised earlier may now be barred by res judicata,' the Chief Justice noted, referring to Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Expressing dissatisfaction with arguments from both sides, the court said the factual record needed clarity. It directed the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) to respond and posted the case for detailed hearing alongside a related PIL highlighting the deteriorating condition of the terminal and the approach roads.
GMADA maintains that the IBC, in its current form, subverts statutory safeguards for public infrastructure by letting financial creditors select resolution applicants solely on financial metrics. It has asked the High Court to remand the case for a technical re-evaluation, restore its statutory role in setting qualification standards, and declare that such projects cannot bypass original eligibility norms.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
11 hours ago
- Time of India
Bombay High Court gets new bench at Kolhapur; sittings from August 18
The Bombay High Court will get a new bench at Kolhapur district in western Maharashtra , which will be the fourth HC bench in the state, and its sittings will commence from August 18. A notification in this regard was issued on Friday by High Court Chief Justice Alok Aradhe. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Operations Management CXO Cybersecurity Others Leadership Artificial Intelligence Product Management healthcare Data Science Healthcare Data Analytics MCA Degree Management Design Thinking Digital Marketing PGDM others Project Management Public Policy Finance MBA Technology Data Science Skills you'll gain: Quality Management & Lean Six Sigma Analytical Tools Supply Chain Management & Strategies Service Operations Management Duration: 10 Months IIM Lucknow IIML Executive Programme in Strategic Operations Management & Supply Chain Analytics Starts on Jan 27, 2024 Get Details "I, Alok Aradhe, Chief Justice of the High Court at Bombay, with the approval of the Governor of Maharashtra, appoint Kolhapur as a place at which Judges and Division Courts of the High Court may also sit, with effect from August 18, 2025," the notification said. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Unsold 2022 Cars Now Almost Free - Prices May Surprise You Unsold Cars | Search Ads Learn More Undo As per officials, a roster of how many judges would be sitting at the Kolhapur bench, which is likely to cover half a dozen districts, would be prepared next week. At present, apart from the principal bench in Mumbai, the high court has two more benches -- at Nagpur in eastern Maharashtra and Aurangabad (Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar) in the central region of the state. Live Events A third bench of the high court sits in adjoining Goa. The notification comes amid demands from various quarters over the years for a bench at Kolhapur so as to ease the burden on litigants and lawyers who have to travel to Mumbai, around 380km away, for hearing of their pleas. The new bench is likely to have jurisdiction over six districts - Satara, Sangli, Solapur, Kolhapur, Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg (last two located in coastal Konkan region). Chief Justice of India B R Gavai had earlier this month also supported the demands for a HC bench at Kolhapur. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis posted the notification published in an official gazette on social media platform X and noted the decision to set up the bench at Kolhapur will bring much-needed relief to litigants and legal professionals in the region. Terming it a "historic development," the CM expressed his delight at the decision, stating the matter had been under active consideration since the beginning of his tenure. "It was a long-standing demand of the people, and I had been pursuing it consistently. I am extremely delighted it has now succeeded," said Fadnavis, who also handles the law and judiciary portfolio. The CM extended his gratitude to CJI Gavai and HC Chief Justice Aradhe for their support in enabling the setting up of the new bench. "This will make justice more accessible and efficient, while saving citizens' time, effort, and money," he added, congratulating the people and legal fraternity of the region.
The Print
11 hours ago
- The Print
Socialist planners aggravated unemployment problem
Now the question is whether it is possible and advisable to plan to achieve full employment in the short period, and whether our planners bent upon establishing socialist pattern of society can achieve the same. It is now recognised that the two objectives of achieving maximum rate of economic growth and the attainment of full employment do not go together in the short period of time though they are compatible in the long run. In the words of Shri V. V. Giri, 'The primary object of democratic planning in India should be to absorb the surplus work force by so drafting the programme of development as to yield full employment.' The same view persisted during the Third Five-Year Plan, 'Full utilisation of manpower resources can be achieved after a considerable period of development'. From these it is quite clear that the Planners have given a secondary importance to the employment aspect with the result that the backlog of unemployment is increasing from plan to plan. Our Five-Year Plans are based on certain objectives and one of them is to achieve maximum utilisation of manpower in order to achieve full employment but one must say with regret that employment is not the main objective with our planners with the result that little attention has been paid to the need for maximising employment which has been regarded as the bye-product of economic development. This view can be seen from the following excerpts. At the time of Second Five-Year Plan it was stated by the Planning authorities that 'the problem of unemployment especially in an underdeveloped country like ours can only be solved after a period of intensive development in determining the programme for the next five years the prime consideration is that at least the deterioration in the unemployment situation should be arrested'. The Directives in the Constitution envisage full employment and the right to work and live, but employment is full when everybody who wants to work can find it at established rates of pay. According to W. Beveridge, 'Full employment exists only when there are always more vacant jobs than unemployed men. It means that the jobs are at fair wages, of such a kind, and so located that the unemployed men can reasonably be expected to take them; it means, by consequence, that the moral lag between losing one job and finding another will be very short'. It must be remembered here that in normal times 100% of the working population in employment can never exist; a minimum of unemployment is bound to exist but in our country unemployment problem has become a very serious problem next to exchange crisis; it was argued that free capitalist countries failed to achieve full employment and only socialist economy can do the trick but our socialist planners have aggravated the problem by adopting unrealistic fiscal policy. By imposing direct as well as indirect taxes in the name of emergency and development incentives to save and invest have been greatly reduced. Employment cannot be increased without investment. Investment is based on the expectation of profit, which is a sine qua non of economic progress, but our Finance Minister has imposed super profit tax in the last budget so that the private sector will have no incentive to invest and as a consequence of this, employment will tend to fall. The backlog of unemployment at the end of Second Plan in 1961 is reckoned at 9 million. The number of new entrants to the labour force during the Third Plan period (1961-66) will be as many as 17 million. The Planners are expected to provide employment opportunities for about 14 million people. Thus the reserve army of man-power at the end of the Third Plan will be as high as 12 million persons. For this reason, the planners should give priority to the eradication of unemployment once and for all during the Third Plan. The Mahalanobis strategy, in this respect, has miserably failed because it was based on a wrong assumption, namely, that increasing purchasing power through investment in heavy industries in the public sector, and through expenditure on health, education, and social services, and, secondly, a planned supply of consumer goods could meet the increasing demand. The problem of unemployment can be solved. This strategy would have been successful if capital were available in adequate quantity to expand the consumer goods industries when the development and expansion of heavy and basic industries were given top priority in the Second Plan period. The Planning Commission gave more emphasis on cottage and household industries rather than on large-scale consumer goods industries. The problem of unemployment could not be tackled satisfactorily by the Planning Commission due to the absence of the creation of adequate new employment opportunities in large-scale industries producing consumer goods. The problem of unemployment would not have taken a serious turn during the Second Plan period if the planners had curtailed the volume of investment in heavy industries and released capital was utilised for the expansion of employment in the large-scale consumer goods industries. As a consequence of this policy the price level would have come down and the value of rupee would have gone up. During the Second Plan period the prices rose by 6 per cent per annum and this was mainly due to the large dose of deficit financing during the last two years of the Second Plan. In the Third Plan we find that the Planning Commission has not attempted to frame a co-ordinated policy for creating employment opportunities for 26 million persons. The Planning Commission has chalked out a programme for creating employment for 14 million persons, but whether even this can be achieved or not is problematic. The imposition of super profit tax will certainly kill the incentive of the private sector to invest and this will aggravate the problem of unemployment in the Third Plan and the Fourth plan will begin with a backlog of unemployment not less than 15 million persons. The major burden of reducing unemployment lies in raising the level of investment in the economy which is the key factor in increasing employment as well as to increase the tempo of economic development. To achieve this objective, the private sector should be given proper scope to play a vital role in the economic growth of our economy. The present policy based on ideological grounds should be reversed and then alone the twin problems of unemployment and rapid economic growth can be solved. The private sector should not be treated with indifference. Economic growth should not be the monopoly of the public sector alone. Rural as well as urban unemployment can be successfully tackled if labour intensive or capital saving techniques are adopted. This may lead to a slow progress in our planning but that is inevitable. Planning aims at utilisation of available resources in the best possible manner to attain the higher standard of living. Economic growth of a country is as much dependent on the development of its people and the people who are denied employment are the people who are denied the chance of development. In a country like ours with large unemployed and underemployed manpower planning for employment is preferable because employment will bring about an increase in output. Abundant labour supply should be regarded as an asset rather than a liability in the sense that it presents opportunities for augmenting production. Because of this factor, employment planning has a greater significance in a country like India. A suitable strategy for employment planning can be thought out only in regard to the future. In the Third Plan greater attention is paid to growth than to employment. The unemployment problem is bound to become serious and the Fourth and Fifth Five-Year Plans should give top priority to the employment problem. It is estimated that during the Fourth and Fifth Plan, addition to the labour force would be about 23 and 30 million. This reinforces the case for an active population policy. In the Third Plan, the Government has also failed to frame a realistic population policy to control the rate of growth of population. The price policy has failed to keep the rising prices under control. In this respect, one cannot expect that the Government should be able to create employment opportunities for 14 million persons. In this regard, Japanese experience has a good bearing for India. In that country, the absorption of manpower in non-agricultural occupations has shown a very great rise in the inter-war period. This was mainly due to the labour intensiveness of Japanese small-scale units. This policy can be followed in our country by giving small-scale industries, which are employment-creating industries. They will not only create employment opportunities but will also increase the total supply of consumer goods, which is scarce in relation to demand. In these industries, the gestation period is shorter than in the large-scale heavy industries, which are capital intensive. So the problem of unemployment can be eradicated in the next two Five-Year plans if top priority is given to the employment aspect instead of the growth aspect. Economic development and employment must go hand in hand and this can be achieved by adopting a free market economy. The planned economy has failed to solve the problem. West Germany and Japan have shown the way. This essay is part of a series from the Indian Liberals archive, a project of the Centre for Civil Society. It is taken from the economic supplement of The Indian Libertarian and titled 'Planning and Employment in India', published on 15 April 1963. The original version can be accessed here.
New Indian Express
14 hours ago
- New Indian Express
SEZ rent disputes won't come under Rent Control Act, rules Kerala High Court
KOCHI: In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has held that rent-related disputes involving units operating within Special Economic Zones (SEZs) cannot be brought before regular rent control courts. It quashed proceedings initiated by the developer of SmartCity-Kochi before the Munsiff Court, Ernakulam (Rent Control), ruling that such matters must be dealt with under the SEZ Act, 2005. A division bench of Justices A K Jayasankaran Nambiar and P M Manoj allowed a petition filed by Musthafa & Almana International Consultants, a firm functioning in SmartCity-Kochi, challenging the maintainability of the rent control case filed by the developer, SmartCity (Kochi) Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, promoted by Dubai Holding. The lower court had accepted the developer's petition under the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965, alleging non-payment of over Rs 61 lakh in sub-lease rent and charges. But the High Court observed that the lease agreement between the parties was an outcome of the petitioner's SEZ approval and could not be treated as a regular landlord-tenant relationship. 'The remedy chosen by the developer was not one that was available to it in law,' the court said, adding that the issue was integral to the broader question of whether the petitioner continued to qualify as an 'entrepreneur' under the SEZ Act. If the unit has violated lease terms, the court noted, the developer must approach the SEZ Development Commissioner for cancellation of approval. Only then can eviction proceedings be initiated under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act. The judgment comes at a time when Dubai Holding, one of the main promoters of SmartCity-Kochi, has announced plans to exit the project, and the Kerala government is exploring a takeover of the venture in Kakkanad. 'We've argued from the start that this isn't a Rent Control case,' said Musthafa Zafeer O V, founder of the petitioner firm. 'The High Court agreed and dismissed the proceedings initiated before the Munsiff Court, Ernakulam,' he said.
