<p> <br />The final hearing of the writ petition challenging the closure of HAL airport took an interesting turn in the High Court on Thursday with the division bench headed by Justice V G Sabhahit recusing to hear the matter after the petitioner’s advocate accused the bench of being biased.<br /><br />After 15 long hours of his submission, the counsel for the petitioner was on the verge of completing his argument seeking to reopen the HAL airport. He cited several contractual agreements and some Supreme Court orders. The division bench stated that the employees are not performing their duty properly.<br /><br />The counsel who objected to it, said, “The Airports Authority of India (AAI) and the Union government have nowhere in the writ petition made such statements against the petitioners. So, how can court come to such conclusions?”<br /><br />Senior counsel Udaya Holla, appearing for the Bangalore International Airport Limited (BIAL) objected to the statement made by the petitioner’s counsel and said that the latter had taken the court for a ride making such allegations. <br /><br />The bench also objected to the statement made by the petitioner’s counsel and decided to recuse from the hearing.</p>
<p> <br />The final hearing of the writ petition challenging the closure of HAL airport took an interesting turn in the High Court on Thursday with the division bench headed by Justice V G Sabhahit recusing to hear the matter after the petitioner’s advocate accused the bench of being biased.<br /><br />After 15 long hours of his submission, the counsel for the petitioner was on the verge of completing his argument seeking to reopen the HAL airport. He cited several contractual agreements and some Supreme Court orders. The division bench stated that the employees are not performing their duty properly.<br /><br />The counsel who objected to it, said, “The Airports Authority of India (AAI) and the Union government have nowhere in the writ petition made such statements against the petitioners. So, how can court come to such conclusions?”<br /><br />Senior counsel Udaya Holla, appearing for the Bangalore International Airport Limited (BIAL) objected to the statement made by the petitioner’s counsel and said that the latter had taken the court for a ride making such allegations. <br /><br />The bench also objected to the statement made by the petitioner’s counsel and decided to recuse from the hearing.</p>
