Dave’s letter to CJI: Adani Group cases listed incorrectly
Dushyant Dave has written to CJI Ranjan Gogoi alleging two cases involving Adani Group companies were listed and disposed of flouting traditional practice and the procedure followed by the top court
Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave has written to Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi alleging two cases involving Adani Group companies were listed and disposed of flouting the traditional practice and the procedure followed by the top court.
Dave cites first case — Parsa Kenta Collieries Ltd vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited. A civil appeal of 2018 originated from a special leave petition (SLP) that was granted leave on August 24, 2018 by a bench headed by Justice Rohinton Nariman. On May 9, the court published the list of cases to be taken up during the summer vacation of the court.
Dave contends in the letter that according to the order of Registrar R.K. Goel on March 14, 2019, this civil appeal was not ready for hearing. Instead, it was listed on May 21 before a bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra, which heard the arguments of senior advocate Ranjit Kumar and listed the matter for further hearing on May 22. On that day the court concluded the hearing and reserved the judgement.
Dave alleges that there were many other counsels involved in the matter, but they were not informed on this development. Dave in his letter queried, "Did the Bench inquire into its urgency? Seems not. Did the Bench take up other matters for hearing which were older and urgent? Seems unclear." Finally, the civil appeal was allowed partly through a judgement on May 27.
Dave pointed out the second case of Adani Power (Mundra) Ltd vs. Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission and Ors. In this case, on May 24, the matter was heard by a bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai and Surya Kant.
Later, the bench reserved the judgment. Dave claims that this case should not have been entertained for early hearing, as it did not come under the ambit of circulars dated April 29 and March 7. Dave claims the junior advocate from the office of the respondent Advocate on Record urged the bench not to take up the matter, but it heard it. As a result, the appeal was allowed. Dave alleges, the Adani Group may benefit thousands of crores from these two judgments.
"Both these matters were listed, taken up and heard without any justification in a hurry and in an improper manner. As a result, besides causing grave injury to public interest and public revenue, it has caused immense damage to the image of the Supreme Court. It is disturbing that the Supreme Court of India should take up regular matters of a large corporate house during the summer vacation in such a cavalier fashion", claims Dave's letter.
Dave claimed he did not intend to comment on the merits of the two judgments, instead he was pointing out procedural violations in listing the cases. He has requested the Chief Justice to look into the issue and take appropriate steps.