State of Karnataka & Anr. vs All India Manufacturers Organization - Supreme Court Case
State of Karnataka & Anr. vs All India Manufacturers Organization - Important Supreme Court Cases 2006
On 20th April, 2006, a three Judges Bench in State of Karnataka & Anr. vs All India Manufacturers Organization & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 3492-3494 of 2005] rejected appeals filed by the State of Karnataka against the judgment of Karnataka High Court directing it to continue implementation of the “Banglore–Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project”. The said project had the twin objectives of providing an express highway linking Bangalore with Mysore, and of developing infrastructure along the corridor and in and around Bangalore city.
Taking an overall view of the matter, the Bench held that “there could hardly be a dispute that the Banglore–Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Project is a mega project which is in the larger public interest of the State of Karnataka and merely because there was a change in the Government, there was no necessity for reviewing all decisions taken by the previous Government, which is what appears to have happened.” The Bench found it strange that “the State Government woke up after seven long years, and even more strangely after a change in the State’s political leadership, to the fact that there was fraud/misrepresentation” by M/s Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Ltd. [the company serving as a corporate vehicle for development and implementation of the project] or anyone else. It further held that “the constitution and functioning of the Expert Committee” set up to go into the allegations of excess land acquired by the Government for implementation of the Project “also illustrated the mala fides with which the State Government has approached the Project.”
Considering the “frivolous arguments and the mala fides” with which the State of Karnataka and its instrumentalities conducted litigation before the High Court and this Court, the Bench directed it to pay M/s Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Ltd. costs quantified at Rupees Five Lakhs. The Bench further directed the “two MLAs and a social worker”, who filed PILs challenging the project before High Court and then filed appeals before this Court, to pay, in addition to the costs already imposed on them by the High Court, costs quantified at Rupees Fifty Thousand.