Hindustan Motors claims WB govt seized closed plant unlawfully; unutilised land taken back: State
Ltd on Tuesday alleged that the
West Bengal government
unlawfully took possession of its plant in Hooghly district without notice, though the matter is pending in the Supreme Court.
Responding to the accusation, a senior official said the state government had taken back 395 acres of land in 2022 from the sick company as it remained unutilised.
The company was given ample opportunities to demonstrate its use, which it failed to do, the land department official told PTI.
Hindustan Motors'
Uttarpara plant
, where the iconic Ambassador cars were manufactured, has been at the centre of a prolonged legal tussle with the state government over land rights and resumption issues.
In a regulatory filing, Hindustan Motors said that on July 11, around 11 AM, government officials, accompanied by land department authorities, police personnel and others, entered the company's premises and "wrongfully seized" its property, including documents, machinery, equipment, licensed weapons and even the customs warehouse.
Live Events
"The suo motu action taken by the concerned department of the Government of West Bengal, despite our Special Leave Petition pending before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India
, has caused considerable prejudice to our challenge," the company said.
Hindustan Motors
said it has submitted a formal complaint and protest to the Special Secretary of the state Land and Land Reforms Department, both via email and in physical form, on July 11 and again on July 14.
The company claimed that the state government earlier agreed not to take any coercive action regarding the Uttarpara premises until the Supreme Court hears the matter, which is listed for July 22.
The company also expressed surprise over the state's sudden move despite these discussions.
Hindustan Motors ceased production at the Uttarpara factory in West Bengal in May 2014, while the state government took back 395 acres given to the company by an order dated November 9, 2022.
In Uttarpara, Hindustan Motors had around 720 acres, of which a land parcel of 314 acres was sold to Sriram group in 2009 at Rs 285 crore for real estate development.
Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee earlier announced that her government faced a scarcity of land for industry and decided to take back industrial land lying unutilised to allot it to new entrepreneurs.
"The land was earlier held by Hindustan Motors, but the government resumed it as it was not utilised and held unproductive," a state land department official said.
The Calcutta High Court in May dismissed the writ petition filed by Hindustan Motors Ltd, which had challenged the order of the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal upholding the State's resumption of 395 acres of land under Section 6(3) of the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953.
The court ruled that the petitioners were not entitled to any relief and affirmed the state government's authority to resume the land. A subsequent request for a stay on the judgment was also rejected.
When contacted, an official from C K Birla group expressed wonder at the development but refused to comment.
The state government had entered into a 99-year lease agreement with
Titagarh Rail Systems Ltd
for approximately 40 acres of contiguous land at Mouza Kotrung and Mouza Bhadrakali, Uttarpara, at a consideration of Rs 126.63 crore.
Titagarh had said this strategic land parcel will facilitate the establishment of additional production infrastructure and dedicated areas for forming, testing, and commissioning of Metro coaches and Vande Bharat trains. This will include a test track for conducting dynamic and running tests before delivery.
The newly acquired land is contiguous to Titagarh's existing 34-acre Uttarpara facility and is considered critical for the company's plans to expand its passenger rolling stock business for metro coaches, Vande Bharat trains and specialised rolling stock for the
Indian defence sector
.
Hindustan Motors' Uttarpara plant, which was once home to the iconic
Ambassador car
, has been at the centre of a prolonged legal tussle with the state government over land rights and resumption issues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
14 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
Markets trade lower after firm start, fresh foreign fund outflows dent sentiment
Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs) offloaded equities worth Rs 1,858.15 crore on Wednesday, according to exchange data.
The Print
14 minutes ago
- The Print
CJI's involvement in selection of CBI director is a safeguard, not a subversion
The insertion of judicial oversight was neither accidental nor theoretical. Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1997) emerged from the public shock of the Jain Hawala diaries, its essence was doctrinal, not defensive. The Supreme Court held that the need of the hour is to insulate the CBI from extraneous influence. It insisted on structural measures, not temporary decrees. Parliament listened: the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 entrenched a tripartite panel for the selection of the CBI director — the PM, LoP, and the CJI or his nominee — forming a legal bond between democratic design and historical necessity. The CJI's statutory presence in appointing the head of the nation's premier investigative agency is not a fluke of legal drafting, it is a structural feature. It is a successor to experiences where power went unchecked: the Emergency's weaponisation of law, the Hawala scandal's institutional paralysis. 'Republics are formed, not found,' wrote Philip Bobbitt in The Shield of Achilles , capturing the intentional craftsmanship behind modern constitutionalism. They are not gifts of history, but acts of memory, of caution, of design. Constitutions are not accidental artefacts, they are blueprints of humility, instruments to channel and control power. When the Vice President raises concern over the Chief Justice of India's role in appointing the CBI Director, he touches not on privilege, but on architecture. This is not abstract theory; it is the grammar of a functioning republic. India did not choose the American isolation of powers or the British concentration. We chose a tensioned architecture, where each power leans against the other, not to destabilise, but to steady. Perception and principle If anyone doubts the continuing vitality of that design, recent jurisprudence confirms it. In Common Cause v. Union of India (2021), the Supreme Court upheld statutory requirements for fixed tenure, noting that transparency in appointment and continuity in office are 'constitutional imperatives that flow from independence.' It struck down executive efforts to circumvent the panel. In Dr. Jaya Thakur v. Union of India (2023), the SC further condemned post-tenure extensions as injurious to public perception: where 'perceived capture' prevails, institutional legitimacy collapses. This is not unique to India. Across democratic orders, judicial participation in appointments to sensitive public offices is a safeguard, not a subversion. In the United Kingdom, the Judicial Appointments Commission includes judges in appointments beyond the bench, extending into review boards for oversight bodies. In Canada, judicial members sit on selection panels for integrity commissioners, privacy regulators, and national security review boards. South Africa's Chief Justice serves as the chairperson of the Judicial Service Commission, which advises on prosecutorial oversight. In Israel, the Attorney General, akin to the CBI Director, emerges from a multi-stakeholder process that includes judicial members. Indeed, to place entire control of coercive institutions within the executive is not an act of democracy, it is Hobbes without honesty. It is a rehearsal of Leviathan, cloaked in constitutional formalities but stripped of institutional conscience. The CJI's seat at the table is not a throne, it is ballast. It prevents the investigative state from drifting toward political shores. As constitutional scholar Aharon Barak noted in the Israeli context, 'Judicial participation in public appointments is not to blur the boundary between powers, but to clarify their mutual restraint.' Concerns around post-retirement appointments of judges are not frivolous. They strike at the heart of perceived impartiality. But to conflate that concern with the statutory presence of the judiciary in a democratic appointment process is both analytically lazy and constitutionally unsound. The answer lies in reform, not removal. If Parliament is indeed serious, it may codify a cooling-off period, apply it prospectively and uniformly, and preserve both perception and principle. Also read: Shantonu Sen's CBI tenure was a long battle against corruption—and political interference A quiet reminder In K. Veeraswami v. Union of India, (1991) 3 SCC 655, the SC acknowledged that even unproven allegations can erode public confidence in the judiciary. But that danger cannot justify the dismantling of institutional checks elsewhere. Perception is vital but it must not overpower constitutional intention. One must also resist the urge to confuse participation with dominance. The CJI is one of the three members on the panel for the appointment of the CBI director. He does not hold a veto. His presence is not a counter majoritarian triumph, it is a quiet reminder that public power must not be shaped behind closed doors. To deride that presence as judicial intrusion is to forget the very scandals that demanded it. Yes, constitutions evolve, but they do so by memory, not amnesia. The appointment structure being criticised was crafted after inquiry committees, court orders, and parliamentary deliberation. It came not as an innovation but as an inheritance. To question it casually is to misremember our own institutional biography. As John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton warned, 'The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern.' That includes the Bench, the executive, and the legislature. Which is why the framers, and later Parliament, placed each beside the other, not to dominate, but to co-discipline. This is not the judiciary conquering executive space, nor the executive retreating into symbolism. This is equilibrium earned through political pain, preserved through constitutional memory. The author is an advocate practicing before the Supreme Court of India. Views are personal. (Edited by Aamaan Alam Khan)
Hans India
14 minutes ago
- Hans India
Bihar Elections 2025: Nitish Kumar Promises Free Power Supply up to 125 Units from August
As the Bihar polls gather steam, chief minister Nitish Kumar announcements major relief for residents — free electricity up to 125 units. The chief minister, while announcing the scheme, said his government has always focused on keeping things affordable. 'We have decided that from 1 August 2025, that is, from the July bill onwards, all domestic consumers in the state will free electricity policy Bihar for up to 125 units of electricity,' Nitish said in a post on X. "The objective of the scheme is to benefit nearly 1 crore 67 lakh families in the state as mentioned in the post." "The Uttar Pradesh government will bear the entire cost of solar power system installation for families in extreme poverty under the Kutir Jyoti scheme. Families that are not in extreme poverty will get major financial support so that going solar is affordable." It means domestic consumers will no longer have to bear any cost for electricity up to 125 units, and at the same time, it is estimated that within the next three years, up to 10,000 megawatts of solar energy will be available in the state,' Kumar said. A day earlier, Nitish had asked officials to speed up recruitment of teachers in government schools, instructing officials to initiate the TRE 4 process. He also reiterated that the 35% women's quota is applicable only to women candidates who are residents of Bihar in Bihar elections 2025. Nitish's slew of announcements comes ahead of the Bihar polls, due in late 2025. Earlier, Nitish's former deputy chief minister and RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav had also made a series of welfare announcements, including up to 200 units of free electricty. The RJD has also promised a monthly cash transfer of Rs 2,500 to women under the proposed Mai Behan Maan scheme, and 200 units of free electricity, as well as electricity subsidy in Bihar and gas cylinders at Rs 500.
