Rajasthan High Court Dismisses PIL Against Solar Plant With 50k Cost; Quotes PM Modi, Obama, Etc.

The Rajasthan High Court recently dismissed public interest litigations opposing the allotment of the land made to the respondent-company for establishing the solar power plant in Riwadi. The court noted quotes of world leaders, scientists and environmentalists on the aspects of climate change and its impact which, by use of renewable energy, can help in reversing the process of global warming which has started having a serious adverse impact on the world at large. In this regard, the division bench comprising Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani quoted Hon'ble Prime Minister of India Shri Narendra Modi, "Solar Energy is 'Sure', 'Pure' and "Secure'." "India plans to produce 450 GWS of power through solar energy and other renewable energy sources by 2030" The court also stated quotes of former U.S. President Barack Obama's State of the Union Address in 2015, Thomas Edison and former President of the French Republic Francois Hollande's excerpt on Climate Change. The division bench, while refusing to grant any injunction against the infrastructural project of 'great importance to the mother earth and the entire humanity' and dismissing the PIL as it being it devoid of merit, ruled, "Cost of Rs.50,000/- is imposed on the petitioners in each writ petition which shall be deposited with the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority, within a period of 30 days from today failing which, the District Collector, Jaisalmer shall take appropriate steps for recovery thereof as per law. The District Collector, Jaisalmer and the Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer shall ensure that no persons with vested interest obstruct commissioning of the solar plant in question." Essentially, the Solar Energy Corporation of India had issued a Letter of Award in favour of the respondent M/s.SBE Renewables Ten Projects Private Limited for establishing Inter State Transmission System Connected Wind Solar Hybrid Power Projects (Tranche-I). In furtherance of the said Award, the State Government sanctioned allotment of lands to the company on lease basis for establishing the solar project. The petitioners, by way of PIL, have opposed the aforesaid land allotment in favour of the company. Events Transpired During Course of Hearing On 23.03.2022, arguments were commenced in the pre-lunch session. The petitioner's counsel Shri Moti Singh addressed the Court for a significant period. However, when the arguments were resumed post lunch, the petitioner's counsel was not available and his associate persistently made a request to adjourn the matters. Since, significant judicial time had already been consumed in hearing the cases in pre-lunch session, the Court proceeded to hear the arguments of the respondents' counsel and thereafter, waited for the petitioner's counsel to appear but he did not turn up and accordingly, the order was reserved in both the writ petitions giving liberty to the petitioner to submit written submissions. Thereafter, the petitioner's counsel moved an application alleging that the hearing of the matter was closed in an arbitrary manner and thus, the same should be listed before the Acting CJ, which was subsequently rejected by the Acting CJ. The court opined that the petitioner' counsel presented written submissions wherein without stating anything significant on merits. The court remarked, "The petitioner's counsel has claimed that he was busy in another Court and thus, he was bonafide prevented from appearing before the Division Bench till 3.40 pm. We are of the firm view that once the matters had been taken up by the Bench and extensive arguments had been advanced, there was no justification whatsoever for the learned counsel representing the petitioner to have left the Bench for other commitments. This was an act of rank discourtsey to the Division Bench." Alongwith the written submissions, a letter was submitted by counsel Shri Moti Singh to the President, Rajasthan High Court Advocates Association seeking permission to appear in the court, which was purportedly denied. There is no justification for such a course of action as other counsel have appeared to address the Court. The court further remarked, "No such permission is required for a lawyer to appear in the Court. This is apparently a ploy adopted by the petitioner's counsel to avoid and delay decision of the matters. Be that as it may, despite all the above circumstances, before proceeding to dictate the order, we instructed the Court Master to convey a telephonic message to the petitioner's counsel Shri Moti Singh that he is at liberty to address the Court by physical or virtual mode but he bluntly refused the opportunity so offered. Accordingly, we propose to decide the matters on the basis of the arguments advanced at bar, pleading of the parties and the written submissions filed by Shri Moti Singh Advocate representing the...

Rajasthan High Court Dismisses PIL Against Solar Plant With 50k Cost; Quotes PM Modi, Obama, Etc.

ANIRUDH VIJAY

Tags