Citizens contest government’s decision to designate city as industrial zone
Key Points:
• Over 50 Jamshedpur residents file PIL against industrial town notification
• Petitioners challenge legality of Tata’s land lease and revenue collection
• HC defers hearing pending Supreme Court decision on related case
JAMSHEDPUR – The Jharkhand High Court has deferred hearing a public interest litigation challenging the state government’s decision to designate Jamshedpur as an industrial town.
Over 50 Jamshedpur residents, led by Saurabh Vishnu, have filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Jharkhand High Court.
The petition contests the state government’s December 23, 2023 notification declaring Jamshedpur an industrial town.
Petitioners argue this move violates citizens’ constitutional right to self-governance.
They claim it perpetuates Tata Company’s colonial-era control over the city.
The High Court bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Arun Kumar Rai, heard the case on Friday.
Legal Arguments Presented
Jharkhand’s Advocate General referenced a 2018 Supreme Court order during the hearing.
He argued it supported the government’s authority to designate Jamshedpur as an industrial town.
However, the petitioners’ lawyer, Akhilesh Srivastava, countered this claim.
He stated the 2018 case was unrelated to the current industrial town notification.
Srivastava emphasized that Jamshedpur residents were not party to any private agreement between the state and Tata.
"Citizens have the right to challenge the legality of the industrial town designation," he asserted.
Land and Revenue Disputes
The petition also raises concerns about land acquisition and revenue collection.
It questions the legality of Tata’s lease on 15,725 acres of government-granted land.
The petitioners allege Tata has illegally sub-leased 12,708 acres to non-tribal individuals.
They claim the company has unlawfully collected land revenue for a century.
"We request the court to declare the lease invalid and order Tata to deposit collected revenue into the government treasury," Srivastava explained.
Court’s Decision and Future Implications
The court acknowledged the complexities of the case.
It noted that control of Jamshedpur’s land would depend on the final legal designation of the city.
Given the pending Supreme Court case filed by Jawaharlal Sharma in 2018, the High Court decided to defer its hearing.
The judges stated they would revisit the current PIL after the Supreme Court’s decision.
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear Sharma’s case on September 20, 2024.
Critics argue the industrial town designation aims to maintain Tata’s historic control over Jamshedpur.
They claim it has led to unauthorized expansion of Tata’s facilities and reduced the city’s official area.
The petitioners also allege a massive fraud in the August 20, 2005 lease agreement between the state and Tata.
They argue the municipal corporation should have rights over the land and revenue collection.
"Tata has illegally collected approximately lakhs of crore rupees in land revenue, including interest," claimed a source close to the petitioners.
The case highlights the complex history of governance in Jamshedpur.
According to the critics of Industrial City status, while other Indian cities established municipal corporations decades ago, Jamshedpur’s status remains contested.
Legal experts suggest this case could have far-reaching implications for urban governance and industrial control in the region.
