B L WADEHRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who is a practising advocate of this court has filed this public interest litigation in which has prayed that the MOU dated 13.2.1996 signed between the Ministry of Power and the Apollo Hospitals Group and the Pacific Gas and Electric Company for setting up 200 MW Apollo Power Project in South Delhi be declared as null and void. It is also alleged in the petition that the clearance for setting up the said power project has been granted by the Lieutenant Governor in brazen violation of the directives of the Union Ministry of Energy and of the 26th Report of Lok Sabha's Standing Committee on Energy as it involves no Competitive Bidding and therefore it lacks transparency.

(2.) This Court issued show cause notice and in pursuance thereof counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 by Mr.Rajiv Yaduvanshi, Joint Secretary, Department of Urban Development Government of N.C.T. of Delhi preliminary objection has been taken in reply that the petition proceeds on an erroneous statement of facts and the facts stated in the petition are at Variance with the record. The entire petition proceeds on the basis that the Memorandum of Understanding was execated on 13.2.1996. This is factually incorrect. In fact the Memorandum of Intent came to be executed between the signatories thereof on 13.2.1995 and not on 13.2.1996. It may be pertinent to mention that in the rejoinder-affidavit filed by the petitioner on 26.7.97, he apologised for the typographical mistake and submitted that the MOU was signed on 13.2.95. It was, however, wrongly typed as 13.2.1996.

(3.) Mr. Gaurav Duggal, counsel appearing for respondent no.1 Delhi Administration, also filed written synopsis on 18.9.97 in which it is mentioned that the Ministry of Power intended to enforce the directive of making Competitive Bidding mandatory in the month of February, 1995 and subsequently, as evident from the documents filed the cut-off date has been fixed as 18.2.95. The MOU for Apollo Project was entered into before the said cut-off date i.e. 13.2.1995, and, therefore, the said MOU is valid and cannot be assailed on that ground.