(1.) TWO writ applications preferred by Tata Motors Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Tatas) were heard by me between 28th July, 2011 and 16th September, 2011, when hearing was concluded. One challenges the constitutionality of the Singur Land Rehabilitation and Development Act, 2011, hereafter the impugned Act and the action of the State thereunder; the other, the Singur Land Rehabilitation and Development Rules, 2011, framed under it.
(2.) THE history before institution of this litigation is of paramount importance. I will try to recount the events, which finally led to this contested litigation. In and around 2006, the Government of West Bengal was trying to invite the Tatas to set up an establishment for the manufacture of their conceived small car Nano. THE Tatas, it seems to me, were being similarly entreated by some other states in the country, to set up the industry there. One of such states was Uttarakhand. It offered them many incentives and concessions. THE Tatas were willing to consider investment in West Bengal provided its government was able to outmatch these benefits. I have no doubt, in my mind, that the government was able to convince them that they would make available to them comparable if not better incentives, concessions and exemptions. THE Tatas did decide to manufacture this small car here. THEy announced to the world that the manufactured car would be cleared from the Singur factory in District Hooghly in October, 2008.
(3.) ON 20th December, 2006, the fourth respondent wrote to the Tatas asking them to take permissive possession of 950 acres of land pending finalization of the lease deed and lease terms and conditions. The letter also mentioned that this respondent had acquired land measuring 997 acres. They proposed to lease out 950 acres of this land to the Tatas and its selected vendors. The persons who, were to set up auxiliary or ancillary industries around the Tatas factory in Singur were referred to as the vendors.