Karnataka HC asks Centre on how NHAI should be dealt with for arguing Environment Protection Act was enacted at the instance of foreign powers

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday refused to allow the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to withdraw its controversial affidavit in which it alleged that the Environment Protection Act was enacted at the instance of foreign powers..Recently, in a matter related to an order passed by the Union Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, the NHAI had stated,"The [Environment Protection] Act was passed by the Parliament not only for protection of environment but also at the instance of foreign powers. And many NGOs are filing such writ petitions at the instance of foreign powers.".The Court also refused to accept the intervention application filed by the NHAI, noting that the Authority has not complied with its directions passed on January 11..The Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice BA Patil stated,."We have perused the IA filed by NHAI. We find that compliance on various directions issued under order dated 11 January, 2021 has not been made. it seems that NHAI has filed the present IA hurriedly. The bonafide of NHAI has to be tested based on compliance to the directions issued under the order dated 11 January 2021.".The Division Bench also orally directed the Union of India to respond on the action it was planning to take against NHAI for going to the extent of saying that a law was enacted at the instance of foreign powers..Pointing out that the NHAI had failed to comply with its directions passed on the last date of hearing, the Bench said,"Application (filed by NHAI) does not contain a whisper about compliance of directions issued in para 14 and 15 and 20, of the order. As if NHAI feels it is above the law and it will not comply with any orders of the Court.".The Court was informed that the advocate who earlier represented NHAI had been removed and that Senior Advocate Udaya Holla would be representing the Authority now. .Explaining the development, Holla told the Court,"What happened was because of urgency to file the statement of objections. The advocate prepared it and he signed it. Normal procedure is that they send it to the Head Office, which vets it. This was not done. Normally, when there is a senior counsel appearing, he vets it, that was also not done.".I have seen the statement of objection, it is absolutely sacrilegious.Senior Advocate Udaya Holla.When the Bench pointed out that the present application was filed by the same advocate, Holla responded,"The advocate, who was on retainer, has now been terminated. The IA was prepared by him before the order was made available." .Unable to accept this submission, the Bench said that "this is no justification that order copy was not available. We never directed you to file IA in a specific time. Why should you file this IA?".As the hearing progressed, Holla also sought for permission to file a fresh affidavit explaining all the events till now. "I have seen the statement of objections, it is absolutely sacrilegious. I entirely bow down to what is falling from your Lordships. If the matter is taken up next week, we will place everything on record as to what compliance we have done," he said. .Chief Justice Oka then said,"We are putting you to notice, of course we can't prevent you from filing a better statement of objections, as you have to contest the matter on merits. But even if the Bench permits, it will be subject to very heavy cost.".In a bid to seek the Court's forgiveness, Holla quoted the proverb, "To err is human and to forgive is divine." ."Our job is to show magnanimity, we can show magnanimity provided we are satisfied that the system is corrected. We are giving you a choice, to file a better application and let these officers pay a substantial amount by way of donation to any charitable organisation and produce receipts. We won't impose cost on you," responded the Chief Justice. .As the matter drew to a close, the Court observed, "Sometimes we get the impression, this is not the first matter, that the statement of objection is drafted by contractors of NHAI. This is a classic case. Therefore, we have said we want to know the procedure for drafting and filing the statement of objections." .The matter will be next heard on February 2..NHAI had filed the controversial statement of objections in a PIL challenging an order issued by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change in 2013 granting exemption for the expansion of National Highways greater than 100 kilometres without conducting Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)..On the last date of hearing, a shocked Chief Justice Oka said that he had never come across such obnoxious arguments by a government agency in his 17 years as High Court judge.