SC to hear arguments on Sethusamudram project on Thursday

The Centre's anxiety to push through the controversial Sethusamudram Shipping Canal project was apparently visible when it urged the Supreme Court to hear its plea for vacating the interim order on "Rama Setu" within a restricted time-frame. "The arguments on vacating the interim order should be completed within a restricted time-frame," said senior advocate Fali S Nariman, who has been roped in by the Centre to argue its case. However, Janata Party President Subramanium Swamy and others opposing the project contested the Centre's plea saying that it cannot be heard within a restricted time-limit of one or two days as the issue involved was of national importance and linked to religious faith of 800 million people. The matter which was fixed for arguments on Wednesday could not be proceeded with and was posted for hearing on Thursday as lawyers appearing in the case brought to the notice of the court that there was some confusion as the order mistakenly showed that the matter will be heard on 1st May. At the outset, Nariman expressed the urgency for hearing the Centre's application seeking vacation and modification of the 31st August, 2001 interim order which had allowed the dredging activity for the project to continue to the extent that it did not in anyway cause any damage to the "Rama Setu." The interim order was continued when on 14th September, the Centre promised to review the project after withdrawing its two controversial affidavits questioning the existence of Lord Rama and a man-made bridge "Ram Setu" or Adams Bridge. Besides Swamy, senior advocates Soli J Sorabjee, K K Venugopal, Rajeev Dhavan and M N Krishnamani, appearing for those opposing the project, said if the dredging activity was allowed to continue the "Rama Setu" would be broken and the petitions against the project would become infructous. "For hearing the matter of such importance why arguments be restricted to one or two days. It is a matter affecting the nation which involves 800 million citizens," Venugopal submitted before a Bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan. "It is a issue of faith," he further said. "It would not be rational to hear in one day the matter which involves religious faith," Dhavan and Krishnamani said. The senior advocates said the hearing could not be restricted to a day or two on the project which has been under consideration for more than a century. During the arguments, the Bench wanted to make sure from the two sides whether they were going for final hearing on the main matter or they will be advancing arguments on the interim order. Swamy and others said the matter was fixed for final hearing. Meanwhile, the Bench also comprising Justices R V Raveendran and J M Panchal, allowed Swamy to mention his application to make Union Minister for Shipping and Transport T R Baalu, a party in the matter. He has accused Baalu of pushing through the project for his and his family's private and pecuniary interest. Since there was alleged conflict of interest between Baalu's private business and the impartial performance of his duties as a Minister, who is connected to the project, he should be made a respondent in the matter, he said.

"Loved reading this piece by Prakash Yedhula?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group