JOIN USGovt, NICE refuse to budge, BMIC row gets knottier
It’s back to square one for the jinxed Bangalore-Mysore Infrastructure Corridor project.
Negotiations between the government and the project promoter, Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise (NICE), held recently to resolve the long-standing legal dispute, have failed. Both the parties have decided to go back to the court for justice as they refused to budge an inch from their respective stands. The project, conceived in 1995, hit the legal hurdle over land issues. The Supreme Court had, in April this year, directed both the parties to hold negotiations for resolving the issues and resuming the project work.
The two parties held three meetings from May this year – May 14, June 23 and August 24. Though almost all the contentious issues were discussed at the meetings held at the office of the Advocate General, Karnataka, in Bengaluru, none of them was sorted out. The government was represented by chief secretary Arvind Jadhav, Advocate General (AG) Madhusudan R Naik and senior advocate Arvind P Datar, while Baba Kalyani of Kalyani Group of Companies and senior advocate Dushyant Dave were among those who represented the project promoter.
As per the proceedings of the meetings, lengthy arguments were held on whether the promoter had the right to develop and sell project land at interchanges, especially at Section A comprising peripheral road, link road, 13.5-km of expressway and one township – located on the outskirts of Bengaluru where the land prices are high.
The government had been contending that the promoter was demanding excess land under Section A and over-reaching its rights and obligations. Dave argued that the promoter was entitled to take up development activities on any project land, including at interchanges, as per Article 3.2.3 of the Frame Work Agreement (FWA).
“GoK (government of Karnataka) covenants that it will not restrict the use of land in any way and that the company shall have fill freedom and discretion to industrially and commercially develop and use the land, as generally contemplated by this agreement (sic),” Dave said, quoting the FWA.
Datar said that the rights of the promoter were restricted only to the collection of toll under the toll road component of the project, as per the FWA and the BMIC project technical report.
“Any development and sale of land was only envisaged (and permitted) in the township (sic),” he said. The AG said the promoter cannot claim the rights for development, citing the Outline Development Plan, as it is only a land use plan for the project area.
‘Firm insists on land development’
Dave said the BMIC project will become economically unviable if the land development at interchanges is not allowed and that his client will not be interested in the project if the permission is not accorded for this purpose. Datar sought to know from Dave whether he was considering terminating the FWA. But Dave emphatically denied it. He also denied that the company was willing to refer the issue to an arbitrator, as per the proceedings.
When Dave repeatedly insisted that the project will become unviable if development of land is not allowed, Arvind Jadhav asked Baba Kalyani to furnish the company’s financials and the land use plan so that he can place the issue before the Cabinet.
Kalyani then offered to personally meet the chief secretary to resolve the issue, the proceedings of the first meeting held on May 14, a copy of which is available with this paper, said.