Comments
The Kerala High Court has adjourned by two weeks hearing on a writ petition challenging the Cochin Port Trust decision to discontinue operations at Rajiv Gandhi Container Terminal.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Manjula Chellur and Justice K. Vinod Chandran adjourned the hearing to enable the port and other respondents to file objections to the petition.
Vallarpadom role
CPT took the decision to stop operation of the RGCT, following the commissioning of the International Container Transshipment Terminal (ICTT) at Vallarpadom, now being operated by India Gateway Terminal Private Ltd. (IGTPL).
The petition was filed by B. Hamza, general secretary of Cochin Port Labour Union. The petitioner pointed out that a proviso regarding the discontinuance of the operation of RGCT had been incorporated in the licence agreement thorough amendments after acceptance of the financial bid of the licensee (IGTPL).
The amendments had bestowed undue favours on IGTPL at the cost of public exchequer. In fact, largesse of the ‘licensor’ (CPT) was mainly responsible to a large extent for the financial crisis now faced by CPT, forcing it to lease out its assets to private parties on flexible terms.
Loss of jobs
The petitioner said that around 4,000 workers had been deprived of their legitimate right to employment and constitutional right to live in dignity, with the cessation of all container related activities by the licensor at RGCT from February 18, 2011.
The CPT had also lost the right to handle coastal vessels for the next 30 years. He pointed out that at a host of meetings, the port had assured the leaders of the recognised unions that existing labourers would be allowed in the RGCT apart from retaining the port’s right to handling cargo/containers at RGCT after the licensee shifted its operations to ICTT.
The port sought to justify its decision to shut down RGCT on the ground that that the final licence agreement signed with the licensee in 2005 contained clauses which did not exist in the draft licence agreement that had been circulated publicly for the bidding process.
The petitioner sought a directive to the Comptroller and Auditor General of India to compute the revenue gain to the licensee and the corresponding revenue loss to the licensor on account of the amendments made to the licence Agreement dated 31.01.2005.
Comments
Comments
Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.
We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of TheHindu Businessline and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.