Thread: Friends, I have a short story to tell. About the functioning of the Indian Judiciary. It has characters, plots and subplots. Also a climax. Stay with me till the end. (1/n)
In 2005, India's richest corporation, Reliance Industries wanted to develop a special economic zone (SEZ) in Gujarat's Jamnagar. The state began to acquire 25 sq km land for it but some farmers refused to give up. The land acquisition got stalled — for nearly a decade.(2/n)
In 2014, the Cong govt passed a new land acquisition law (LARR). Section 24(2) of the law says land acquisition initiated under the older laws would lapse if the developer has not taken possession of the land for 5 years or compensation not deposited in land owners’ account (3/n)
The government changed a few months later. The BJP-led Centre and several state governments got worried if farmers and other land owners began using this specific provision of the law, many unfinished projects would get delayed. (4/n)
In next few months, farmers and land owners across the country approached courts to get either their land back or a better deal from deveopers using Section 24(2). In hundreds of judgments, the Supreme Court (SC) and the state high courts (HCs) decided in favour of farmers. (5/n)
The famers of Jamnagar also approached the Gujarat HC against the Reliance SEZ using the provision. While the case was being heard, the Centre tried to knock out the Section 24(2), first with an ordinance and then with the amendment to LARR. But failed due to opposition. (6/n)
What the govt failed to achieve in the Parliament, Reliance managed from the court. It filed a counter petition to that of farmers’ in the Gujarat HC demanding that Section 24(2) be declared invalid or not be applied on private projects. The high court agreed with Reliance. (7/n)
The farmers challenged this HC judgement in the Supreme Court in January 2018 banking on the apex court's previous judgements on the provsion. And this is where it gets more interesting. The matter got listed for hearing before a two-judge Bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra. (8)
While Reliance case was still being heard, another 3-judge Bench headed by Mishra gave judgment in another case related to interpretation of Section 24(2). It said if land owners were offered compensation and they refused to accept it, the land will not be returned to owners. (9)
This judgment would have benefitted Reliance in its case that was supposed to come up before Mishra's in a few weeks. The interpretation of Section 24(2) in this judgement was same as the changes that the BJP government wanted to bring through the ordinance but failed. (10/n)
But judgement was contradictory to a 2014 interpretation of the same clause by a 3-judge Bench, which had decided in favour of farmers. The contradiction was noticed by another 3-judge Bench, under Just. Madan Lokur, which then stayed the judgement of Mishra's Bench. (11/n)
Incidently, Lokur was part of the 3-judge Bench that had delivered the 2014 judgment in favour of land owners. The dispute then reached the Chief Justice of India (CJI), who announced in Feb 2018 that a larger (5-judge) Constitution Bench will be formed to decide the matter. (12)
Now, after more than one-and-a-half years, the Constitution Bench has finally been formed yesterday. Guess who will be heading the Bench? Justice Arun Mishra. Yes, he will lead the hearings to decide whether another Bench under him was right or wrong. (13/n) 
All ongoing cases about Section 24(2), including the Reliance one, will remain pending until the Constitution Bench decides. More on how Reliance made sure the ghost of colonial-era land acquisition law continues to haunt India's farmers here: business-standard.com/article/econom… (14/n)
A senior SC lawyer has written to the CJI pointing how a certain high-profile cases, related to a certain corporates, are being assigned to certain judges in violation of the procedures a few weeks ago. Do read to make up your mind. livelaw.in/top-stories/ad… (15/n)
Read this thread by @VakashaS to understand why J Arun Mishra leading hearings to decide the validity of the earlier decision taken under him is problematic even on legal grounds.
And thi happens today in the court.
To know how the court is responding to this, follow the hearings through this thread. (17/n)
Now attempt being made to discredit fact-based journalism? Here is the truth: All the facts in the above thread were first reported on April 24, 2019 and not on the eve of the hearing. And all the above facts are on the records of the court. Please read.
Today @the_hindu writes in its editorial there is a compelling case for Justice Mishra to withdraw from the land acquision case. "The case history shows that there could be grounds for apprehension that he has a predisposition towards a particular view". Decision on Oct 23 (19/n)
@the_hindu Alert: An application to recall the 2014 judgement of the 3-judge bench under Justice R M Lodha, which favoured farmers and is at the root of the dispute in which J Arun Mishra is leading the hearings to decide validity of another decision under him, will be heard tomorrow...
... Now, note this. This application will also be heard by a 3-judge bench under J Arun Mishra! The application for recall was filed in 2014 itself. It has been listed several times since then but arguments were never heard.
The recall application has come up again a day before the hearing of the Constitution Bench under J Mishra, in which the bench has to decide whether he should recuse from the case to decide the validity of his earlier judgement in another case, which set aside the 2014 judgement.
And the saga continues. “One more word and I will not only issue contempt against you but will also ensure you are convicted,” J Arun Mishra told Sr Adv Gopal Sankaranarayanam, who earlier argued for recusal of J Mishra from the land acquisition case. (21) barandbench.com/land-acquisiti…
Justice Arun Mishra's bench today decides the decision of another bench headed by him was correct. Says the law needs to be read differently than how it is written. Suggests "OR" means "AND". The Reliance Industries will benefit from this judgement (22).
इतिश्री। The chapter ends. अध्याय समाप्त।
