2015: Essar e-mail leak, other corporate houses engaged SC

A verdict castigating RBI for "withholding" information about defaulters, failed bid of jailed Sahara chief Subrata Roy to walk out of prison and matters of Tatas, Birlas, Ambanis and Adanis engaged the Supreme Court in 2015 which also saw the Essar e-mail leak case alleging a political-bureaucratic-corporate nexus.
The year gone by also brought huge relief to telecom major Bharti Cellular's chief Sunil Bharti Mittal and Essar's promotor Ravi Ruia as the apex court in January quashed the CBI court order summoning them as accused in a graft case of additional spectrum allocation during NDA rule in 2002.
However, the relief to Ruias was shortlived as the biggest bombshell was dropped in March by an NGO which came out with the leaked internal e-mails of Essar Group showing high and mighty from the world of politics, business, bureaucracy and media in nexus before the top court which is examining the issues raised in the petition for CBI probe.

Bad luck for Essar's Ravi and Anshuman Ruia continued as the apex court in September dismissed their plea challenging the special CBI court's jurisdiction to hold trial against them in a case arising out of the probe in 2G spectrum scam.
Luck was also not in favour of Roy as his repeated efforts to impress the top court with various plans to garner Rs 10,000 crore to walk out of the jail failed.
Along with the hearing on Sahara chief, the proceedings relating to coalgate engaged the Supreme Court throughout the year which saw former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Aditya Birla Group Chairman Kumar Mangalam Birla getting a relief from appearing as accused in a trial court in connection with alleged irregularities in the allocation of coal block Talabira --II in Odisha.

Names of Singh's former cabinet colleagues P Chidambaram and DMK's Dayanidhi Maran echoed in various proceedings due to Aircel Maxis deal matter in which the DMK leader has been chargesheeted.

Chidambaram's alleged role in giving FIPB clearance to the venture in 2006 as the then Finance Minister was covered by the CBI in its probe report placed in the top court which was monitoring the investigation in the matter having overseas ramification.
Telecom major Vodafone Mobile Services Ltd (VMSL) faced opposition from the Centre which approached the apex court against the TDSAT order allowing provisional merger of the licences of four entities -- Vodafone East, Vodafone Cellular, Vodafone South and Vodafone Digilink into VMSL.

The apex court asked VMSL to pay Rs 2,000 crore to the government in pursuance of the proposed merger of licences of its four entities into itself.
However, issues of gas pricing saw Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) in tug of war with the Centre over Krishna Godavari basin and Panna, Mukta and Tapti Oil and gas fields.
While the petition filed by CPI-M's Gurudas Dasgupta and an NGO was vigorously contested by RIL, the company got a relief when the apex court rejected Centre's plea seeking removal of a foreign arbitrator appointed by it.
Much before the Reliance Jio service was launched, it was also a subject matter in the Supreme Court after a PIL filed by an NGO challenged the grant of 4G licence to the company and sought quashing of the permission by the government for providing voice telephony on Broadband Wireless Access spectrum and pitched for a court-monitored CBI investigation in the alleged Rs 40,000 crore scam.

Corporate houses like Tatas and Adanis also got relief from the Supreme Court which restrained the Maharashtra government from imposing penalty on the sales tax levied on Tata Sons Ltd over the use of the TATA brand name by its subsidiaries while Adani Power Ltd had a temporary relief on the issue of compensatory tariff payable to it.
Real estate majors Supertech and DLF also had a tough time in the apex court. While observing that "developers cannot take investors for a ride," the top court directed Supertech to refund the money of the house buyers whom the real estate major wanted to relocate them from the site of construction which was in violation of the law.

DLF was in the news over the proceedings related to the deposit of Rs 6,630 crore fine imposed on it by Competition Commission of India as the court said that its appeal would be commenced only after full payment of the amount.
The court, on December 14, expressed concern over lack of infrastructure, manpower and other facilities at Debt Recovery Tribunals and their appellate bodies, saying lakhs of crores of rupees were NPAs as the recovery mechanism was not up to the mark.
The bench also said it may ask the National Law School and IIM, Bangalore to jointly conduct a study on what "ails" these quasi-judicial bodies -- Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs) and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunals (DRATs), meant for recovering bad loans of financial institutions.

The Centre had then said steps, including amending the law governing DRTs and the DRATs, have been taken to strengthen the loan recovery system after which the court reserved its order.
Automobile giants like the German Mercedes-Benz and the Japanese Toyota had to approach the Supreme Court urging it to lift its order banning registration of luxury vehicles having engine capacity of 2000cc and above in Delhi and NCR.
They got a major relief when the court, which had ordered the ban due to a spurt in the pollution level, allowed registration of such vehicles on payment of one per cent of the ex-showroom price of such automobiles as green cess.

All telecom companies had a moment of scare when the Delhi High Court upheld the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India's (TRAI) decision making it mandatory for cellular operators to compensate subscribers for call drops, as they rushed to the apex court challenging the verdict.
The top court granted them the relief and struck down the TRAI's regulation saying it was "manifestly arbitrary" and an "unreasonable restriction" on the fundamental rights of telcos to carry out the business.
In the year gone by, the apex court delivered a landmark judgement with a majority verdict of 7:2 upholding the validity of tax levied by states on goods entering their territory, saying they were "well within their right" to design their fiscal legislations.

The court also dealt with high magnitude 2G spectrum scam which had created a political storm in 2010, as it dismissed the pleas challenging jurisdiction of the special 2G court to try Aircel-Maxis deal case in which former Telecom Minister Dayanidhi Maran, his brother Kalanithi and others are accused.
Similarly, it also agreed to examine the plea filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy seeking framing of guidelines for grant of security clearance by the Centre to firms accused of economic offences from taking part in public auctions.
Swamy had said the Delhi and Bombay High Courts had recently taken divergent views on the issue of security clearance by Ministry of Home Affairs while dealing with e- auction process of private FM radio channels.