SC admits Tata's plea on Sasan Power project

SC admits Tata's plea on Sasan Power project

A bench of Justice G S Singhvi and Justice H L Dattu admitted the petition of Tata group firm Tata Power Ltd and fixed the date for hearing for February next year.

"Let them be considered in detail," said the bench while admitting the TPL's plea.
Tata group firm has challenged the Centre's decision to allow Reliance Power usage of coal from mines alloted for Rs 20,000 crore Sasan Power Project to its other power project. It has accused the government of favouritism in taking such a decision.

Earlier, in November 2010, the apex court had issued notices to the Centre, Ministry of Power, Ministry of Coal, RPower, Power Trading Corporation on Tata Power's plea.
The Tata group firm has challenged the Empowered Group of Ministers' (EGoM) decision allowing R-Power to use excess coal from the captive mines meant for the Sasan project in Madhya Pradesh for another 4,000-MW project at Chitrangi in the same state.
In August 2010, the government in an affidavit had said Tata's petition was 'misleading and erroneous'.

It had questioned the locus standi of Tata Power, saying, "The petitioner cannot allege violation of any legal right vis-a-vis tender process, as it waived its right by not extending the bid.

However, Tata Power had refuted these allegations in its rejoinder and submitted that bidding process for Sasan UMPP was never meant or intended to vest the successful bidder to extra coal supply of 9 million tonne per annum, which could be used for developing other power projects.

Further, the Tata group firm had held that it could not be debarred from challenging the subsequent arbitrary actions of the Centre.

In this matter, Sasan Power Ltd, subsidiary of R-Power had in its affidavit alleged that Tata Power Ltd had suppressed information before it, while challenging the bidding process. It contended Tata group firm had lost bid for the 3,960 MW project and, therefore, has no locus standi to challenge the tender process of the UMPP.

"The entire basis of the writ petition is misconceived as all bidder were aware that there is excess coal and that excess coal could be utilised for some other purpose," SPL had said in its affidavit.

DH Newsletter Privacy Policy Get top news in your inbox daily
GET IT
Comments (+)