Tatas don't want Singur land back: West Bengal

Citing a letter, counsel tells court that it was willing to move out if it was adequately compensated

September 06, 2011 02:02 am | Updated November 17, 2021 12:42 am IST - KOLKATA

Tata Motors is not interested in the land of the now relocated Tata Nano factory at Singur; it is only interested in compensation, the West Bengal government told the Calcutta High Court on Monday.

“Tata Motors is not asking for the privilege to retain the land… It is not asking for the restoration. It is asking that the Act [the Singur Land Rehabilitation and Development Act, 2011] be declared illegal, nothing more,” Shakti Nath Mukherjee, counsel for the State government, said at the hearing of the petition Tata Motors filed against the constitutional validity of the Act.

Justice I.P. Mukerji said Tata Motors had, in fact, asked for restoration of possession of the land. “They said they want to defend the lease.”

Citing a letter written by Tata Motors to the State government, in which the company said it was willing to move out if it was adequately compensated, Mr. Shakti Nath Mukherjee said it implied “an element of consent” on the part of Tata Motors.

Mr. Mukherjee argued that the Act did not pertain to the State's right of “Eminent Domain,” but was “merely an eviction Act.” The State was taking back its property by getting rid of the tenant. “Our lease with Tata Motors was person-purpose-and time-specific — within three years and only a small car project,” he said. The company had left, the period had expired and the purpose was frustrated.

Mr. Mukherjee also defended the Act against the argument of counsel for Tata Motors Samaraditya Pal that the provision for compensation in the Act neither specified the amount nor the principles under which compensation might be determined.

“Why has the legislature not laid down the principles to determine the compensation? If it had laid down the principles, they would have acted as a limitation and a restriction,” he asked.

He said that had the principles for determining compensation been specified, according to the Constitution, Tata Motors could not have questioned the compensation amount, if it was not adequate. It could have questioned it, only if it was illusory or arbitrary.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.