Download - Synopsis Writ Petition - West
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
1/21
1
Synopsis
The Petitioner by way of the present writ petition being filed in
public interest, seeks to bring to the attention of this Honble Court,
the fraudulent, deceptive and corrupt acts by the authorities
representing the Government of India, whereby there has been a
grant of largesse of national asset in favour of a foreign airline
(Etihad Airways) resulting in undue enrichment and enormous
pecuniary advantage to such foreign airline at the cost and expense
of the public, national and domestic airlines as well as airports. In
order to facilitate the execution of this colossal fraud on the Indian
exchequer, the foreign airline (Etihad Airways) has agreed to
guarantee personal loans as well as pay a premium towards its
foreign investment in a domestic airlines - Jet Airways. Such grant of
largesse is in the form of an unprecedented increase of capacity
entitlements through execution of Bilateral/ MoU in favour of Abu
Dhabi under existing Air Service Agreement between Government of
India and United Arab Emirates. The actions of the authorities from
the execution of the Bilateral to the unprecedented haste in order to
assist the realisation of wrongful gains by the facilitator are writ large
with acts of collusion and abuse of position.
The Petitioner challenges such arbitrary, irrational and malafide
act of grant of largesse in the form of Bilateral and by way of the
present petition seeks an investigation under the supervision of this
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
2/21
2
Honble Court into the matters of national and public interest, namely
execution of bilateral, enrichment of foreign party at the cost of the
Indian exchequer, diversion of benefits to facilitator as well as the
antecedents of the facilitator; in order for the determination of
complicity of those involved and ultimately the prosecution of those
public servants who abused their position of authority as being guilty
for offences under applicable laws, including the offence of criminal
misconduct in terms of Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of
Corruption Act, 1988
The issues arise in the context of air service access and
capacity entitlements that are typically defined at country level, and
India has exchanged air access and capacity rights through
execution of Bilaterals/ MoUs with more than 100 countries.
However, as a departure from accepted practice, United Arab
Emirates (UAE) seems to have been accorded a special status as
India has executed multiple Bilaterals/ MoUs under a single Air
Service Agreement for exchange of access and capacity rights with
each emirate of UAE i.e. Dubai, Sharjah, Ras Al Khaimah and Abu
Dhabi. It is noteworthy, that Emirates Airlines (state airline of Dubai)
is being called the national airline of India, as it operates more
flights and carries more passengers to and from India than Air India,
our national carrier. The fact that more than 70% of the passengers
from India carried by Emirates Airlines travel to points beyond Dubai
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
3/21
3
on the Emirate network has significantly contributed to Dubais
development as an International hub.
In the aforesaid background, on 24.04.2013 a Memorandum of
Understanding was executed between the Governments of India and
UAE granting an unprecedented, arbitrary, irrational and
unsustainable manifold increase of upto 50,000 seats per week (i.e.
additional 36,670 seats per week over and above existing 13,330
seats per week) in capacity entitlement to Abu Dhabi (an emirate of
UAE) for the benefit of its state owned airline Etihad Airways.
Additionally third country code sharing and domestic code sharing
was allowed. It is the Petitioners case that this increase of capacity
entitlement together with code sharing permission was made with the
underlying intention to grossly and unjustly enrich the foreign airline
for collateral purposes and in the process encourage a foreign
investment into a private domestic airline Jet Airways, that acted as
a facilitator. The grant of such largesse is otherwise malafide, illegal
and contrary to national and public interest as it results in creation of
hurdles to the recovery and health of the national airlines as well as
directly impedes the growth of domestic airports into international
hubs.
It is the Petitioners understanding that the benefit to Etihad
Airways from increase in capacity entitlements/ access, together with
third country and domestic code sharing through the execution of the
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
4/21
4
Bilateral/ MoU, can be reasonably estimated at about Rs. 9,524
crores per annum. Abu Dhabi sought through the Bilateral/ MoU
dated 24.04.2013 to overnight emulate the success of Dubais
emergence as an international hub on the strength of its Emirates
airlines and the gradual increase in capacity entitlements via
Bilaterals executed in its favour over the years. Whereas, as a
consequence of the very same Bilateral/ MoU dated 24.04.2013 a
reasonable estimate of losses that would be incurred by the Indian
national carrier Air India would be about Rs. 2,555 crores per
annum and the losses estimated by other domestic airlines would be
about Rs. 773 crores per annum. It is shocking that on one hand the
Government of India undertakes to infuse Rs. 30,000 crores into Air
India for its revival, and on the other hand executes with deliberate,
malafide intent and collusion Bilaterals which would bring to naught
and waste such infusion of public funds. The losses to major Indian
airports such as Delhi and Mumbai, which may lose their status as
hubs with reduced passenger flows are otherwise unquantifiable,
especially in view of a clear hub strategy of Air India with Delhi as a
chosen hub. Consequently, the currently profit making Airports
Authority of India (AAI) will also face immense hardship as they are
dependent on revenue share from the Delhi and Mumbai Airports not
only for further growth but also for their day to day operations. Thus,
while the only beneficiaries of the Bilateral/ MoU are Etihad Airways
and the facilitator - Jet Airways, the same is clearly at the
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
5/21
5
tremendous cost and expense of the Indian exchequer. This is a
mega fraud in thousands of crores each year.
The Office of the Comptroller Auditor General (CAG) had in its
report titled Performance Audit Report on Civil Aviation in India of
August 2011 has in Chapter 7 Conclusion and Recommendations
therein, come to a conclusion (at Pg 115 therein) that
The current dismal state of affairs of the merged entity Air
India is a combination of a multiplicity of factors such as
..
o a liberalised policy on bilateral entitlements for
international air travel introduced by GoI without
affording adequate time to AIL/ IAL to set their house in
order and gear up for a highly competitive environment,
& subsequent rights being liberally approved to foreign
carriers without any quid pro quo to Indian Carriers.
Also in its examination of the roles of the Government/ Ministry
of Civil Aviation, the CAG report concludes (at Pg. 119 therein) that:
o Freeze on bilateral entit lements to countries/airl ines
predominant ly ut i l is ing 6th
f reedom traff ic Most of the
liberalised entitlements for bilateral rights granted toforeign
airlines (especially in Dubai, Bahrain, Qatar and other Gulf/
SE Asian countries)has been utilised for 6th freedom traffic
and not for genuine traffic to the other country.AI and other
private Indian airlines are handicapped by the lack of
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
6/21
6
adequate hub facilities and other factors (e.g. lack of
agreement for change in gauge at Dubai Airport) from
competing effectively with other predominantly 6th freedom
carriers (e.g.Emirates). Till India has its own effective and
efficient hubs and AI/ other Indian carriersare able to exploit
them effectively (say within 3 to 5 years), entitlements for
airlines/countries predominantly dependent on 6th freedom
traffic (notably Dub ai, Bahrain and o ther Gulf countr ies
in the f i rst instance)should be strictly frozen by MoCA; if
possible,subject to diplomatic and other considerations.
Options for rollback of excessentitlement granted beyond
genuine traffic requirements may also be explored by
MoCA.
Thus, the Bilateral/ MoU signed on 24.04.2013 was contrary to
the findings and recommendations of the CAG in August, 2011
especially when the CAG recommended not only freezing of such
bilaterals with Gulf countries but also reassessment and rollback of
concluded agreements.
Further, while the recommendations of CAG are pending
examination before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the
Parliament, the Respondents for extraneous reasons decided not to
wait for the final report of the PAC and have instead proceeded with
the fresh bilateral agreement with UAE, in complete disregard of
either the recommendations of the CAG or the authority and
consideration by the PAC.
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
7/21
7
The Parliaments Standing Committee on Transport, Tourism
and Culture (hereinafter PSC) comprising of thirty (30)
parliamentarian from the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha, in its
Report No. 191 dated 3rd May, 2013 has made scathing observations
on the execution of the MoU/ Bilateral with Abu Dhabi, granting
unprecedented capacity entitlements while detailing that the same
was not in the interest of the nation and the public. The PSC has
inter alia reported that:
81. The Committee understands that the Government has
increased the bilateral weekly seats between India and Abu
Dhabi to 36,670 seats a week from 13,330 at present. The
Committee also notes that the announcement has come in the
backdrop of Ethihad paying huge premium of 32% over the
market price to pick up just 245 equity in Jet Airways.
82. The increase in bilateral capacity put the premium that
Ethihad paid in perspective. The Committee is aware that
bilateral negotiations between two countries for increasing
airline seats take place only when the existing allotments
become insufficient. The Committee understands that
concerned domestic Airlines have not exhausted those allotted
seats. In such a situation, the Committee is surprised to see
this increase in the bilateral to 36,670 seats a week by the
Government. Prima facie this move appears to facilitate one
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
8/21
8
airline to strike a deal with a foreign Airline for its stake sale at
a huge premium. The Committee feels that the huge premium
could be a backhanded way of obtaining access to the huge
Civil Aviation market in India.
83. The increase in the bilateral is questionable especially in
view of the fact that the Indian carries are not in a position to
use increased seat capacity due to fleet constraint. In such a
situation, the foreign airline may try to catch up passenger
traffic headed to destinations in North America, Europe, Africa
and Middle East resulting in huge losses to Air India and
various airports of India.
.
88. The Committee feels that creating hubs needs time and
also a home carrier with a critical size to be able to sustain the
hub. Air India has just started to create a hub in Delhi as its
chosen hub, which needs to be encouraged/ supported in its
endeavour. The development of events will, no doubt, have
adverse impact on Air Indias efforts in this regard.
89. The Committee finds that Air India is already struggling to
make a turn around as Indian passengers prefer to travel via
the foreign hubs. Rs. 30,000/- crores of tax payers money is
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
9/21
9
being pumped into it by the Government to keep it afloat and
signs of certain turnaround is already visible.
90. . If the Ministry supports the development of more and
more hubs outside India, thousands of crores of taxpayers
money will go waste, not to mention the investment of
thousands of crores made by private enterprise along with the
Government in developing world class airports in Delhi and
other major metros.
91. The Committee, therefore, calls upon the Ministry to
reconsider the Agreement for bilateral with the UAE, which may
be kept frozen at the current level of 13,330 seats and any
bilateral may be opened only after the capacity of the Indian
carriers is increased.
.
93. The Committee recommends that the bilateral
arrangement with the Abu Dhabi may be reconsidered by the
Government to protect our national carrier and the airports of
India.
It is noteworthy that under the Rules of Procedure and Conduct
of Business in the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) the report of a
Standing Committee shall have persuasive value and shall be
treated as considered advice given by the Committee.
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
10/21
10
The saga of corruption, collusion and fraud was not just limited
to the execution of the Bilateral/ MoU on 24.04.2013. In fact, a mere
perusal of the dates leading upto the signing of the Bilaterals
demonstrates how the active corruption and collusion was
undertaken. The Inter-Ministerial Group (IMG) meeting on
18.04.2013 on the negotiation mandate for the execution of the
Bilateral clearly evidences one of the underlying objectives of the
Bilateral being to enable Etihad Airways to invest into Jet Airways.
The IMG however approved a negotiating mandate for enhancement
of total entitlements upto a maximum of 40,000 seats per week i.e.
additional entitlement of 26,670 seats per week together with existing
13,330 seats per week and not 40,000 as demanded by Etihad
Airways. Additionally, the IMG rejected Etihad Airways demand for
third country and domestic code share. Following this, a meeting
was held on 22.04.2013 of a group of Ministers under direction of the
Prime Minister consisting of Ministers of Finance, Commerce,
External Affairs and Civil Aviation, which approved a mandate
different from that given by the IMG. Eithad Airways demands for
additional 40,000 seats per week together with third country and
domestic code sharing were approved contrary to national and public
interest.
The fact is that the negotiations, meetings and discussions of
the bilateral/ MoU through which the Government of India granted a
largesse of increase of capacity entitlement upto 50,000 seats per
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
11/21
11
week from existing 13,330 seats per week in favour of Etihad
Airways, was undertaken in the same place i.e. Abu Dhabi and at the
same time i.e. 23-24.04.2013 as the negotiations between Etihad
Airways to invest and purchase 24% of the shareholding of Jet
Airways (India) Ltd., at an enormous premium by way of preferential
allotment. It is a matter of record that just in less than 48 hours after
the meeting of the group of Ministers which acceded to the
unrealistic demands by the Etihad Airways, the Bilateral was signed
in Abu Dhabi i.e. on the 24th of April 2013 and simultaneously the
announcement of the investment by Etihad Airways into Jet Airways
was made, i.e. on the same date, at the same time and at the same
place.
Thus, not only did the foreign airlines Etihad Airways get a
largesse in the form of unprecedented increase in capacity
entitlement for itself i.e. upto 50,000 seats per week, as well as third
country and domestic code sharing but by investing into the Indian
carrier and entering into inter-se arrangements evidencing effective
control over Jet Airways, it managed to get surrogate control and
reap the rewards from the Jet Airways share of the Indian Bilateral,
thereby effectively getting approximately 90,000 seats per week to
and from India in contrast to the genuine entitlement of merely
13,300 seats.
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
12/21
12
While, the Government of India has as an afterthought sought
to explain the twin fold transactions of Bilateral and foreign
investment into Jet Airways as a coincidence and being otherwise
unrelated. However, media reports suggest that the twin fold
transactions were intrinsically related to the extent that if the Bilateral
had not been agreed exactly the way Etihad wanted, the MoU
between Etihad and Jet Airways for equity investment at huge
premium may not have materialised. Further Media reports also
suggest that the Indian delegation for Bilateral talks with UAE arrived
at Abu Dhabi on 21.04.2013 even before the final approval of the
Government of India on the negotiating mandate which came
through a meeting of four Cabinet Ministers on 22.04.2013, thereby
indicating that the approval itself was a mere formality and was
otherwise pre-determined.
The Petitioner has in his possession and submits for the
consideration of this Honble Court, documents belying the
explanation of coincidence and demonstrating the abuse of position
by the public servants in the Government of India to obtain for Etihad
Airways the valuable and pecuniary advantage of unprecedented
capacity entitlements as well as secure wrongful gains through
receipt of premium by way of foreign investment to private
individuals, including the mysterious owners of Jet Airways, without
any public interest. Such persons/ public servants are liable to be
prosecuted for corruption under the laws of India.
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
13/21
13
In terms of the applicable law in India, foreign investment into
Jet Airways required conformance of sector specific guidelines such
that the existent investment ought to be that of an NRI i.e. a Non
Resident Indian. However, the company Jet Airways (India) Limited
was controlled and managed through a tax haven company - M/s
Tail Winds Limited, which is incorporated in the Isle of Man. The
Indian Government has been ignoring the fact that Tail Winds is an
Overseas Corporate Body i.e. OCB, which since 16.09.2003 stood
de-recognised and permissions for investment made by it were
withdrawn under applicable law. While, various regulatory authorities
have been giving opportunity and advice time and again for Tail
Winds to come clean with its ownership, details of funding, etc and
regularise itself, the matter has dragged on over the last ten (10)
years. It is a matter of fact, that not only has the Government of India
over the past many years been unable to ascertain the beneficial
ownership of the controlling company Tail Winds, rather the nature
and source of funding has remained a mystery. One, Mr. Naresh
Goyal, a Non-Resident Indian has been claiming to exercise
authority over M/s Tail Winds Limited under alleged nomination/
ownership. However, if Mr. Goyal desired any foreign investment into
Jet Airways, he was required by law to at the first instance regularise
the ownership by purchase of Jet shares owned by Tail Wind into his
own name i.e. convert the ownership by a derecognized OCB into
that of an NRI.
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
14/21
14
The Petitioner has documentary evidence to support that
HSBC Private Bank (Suisse) SA, in May 2013 had provided loans of
an unspecific amount to the Promoter Shareholder - Mr. Naresh
Goyal based on purported pledge of shares by Tail Winds for
purchase of securities, foreign exchange transactions etc., through a
Third Party Pledge Agreement. Thereafter, HSBC Securities and
Capital Markets Private Limited being the Trading Member with SEBI
and Indian Stock Exchanges assisted the purchase by Mr. Naresh
Goyal of Jet Airways shares held by Tail Winds. Jet Airways had
applied and taken permission for such transfer/ purchase in the
month of January/ February, 2013 itself. It is now, through
revelations from the inter-se agreements between Jet Airways and
Etihad, it is learnt that it was in fact Etihad Airways, which provided
the guarantee to HSBC for its lending of US $ 300 million to Mr.
Goyal to enable him to commence his attempts to regularize the
ownership of Jet Airways. Thus, evidently Etihad Airways had
bankrolled Mr. Goyal in early 2013 itself to facilitate the grant of the
largesse of unprecedented increase in capacity entitlements by the
Government of India. The collusion is again writ large from the fact
that not only previously, Jet Airways had earlier put down a joint
position paper for CIIs National Committee on Civil Aviation
opposing even the existing bilateral requirement of 13,330 seats with
Etihad, rather had limited its own requirements in the sector to about
6000 seats per week. However, consequent to the finance secured
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
15/21
15
through Etihads guarantees, Mr. Goyal through Jet Airways
demanded an increase of 40,000 seats per weeks to the
Government of India.
In this context, it becomes essential to investigate and
understand as to who is the real owner of Tail Winds Limited? A fact
that even till date, while considering the proposal for foreign
investment, the Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion (i.e.
DIPP), Ministry of Commerce & Industry, made a preliminary
observation on 29/30.07.2013 that the details of shareholding pattern
of OCB (M/s Tailwinds) had not been submitted. It is equally
astonishing that while, Mr. Naresh Goyal declares himself to be an
Indian national albeit a Non-Resident Indian for tax purposes (also to
be eligible for investment as an NRI under the applicable FDI policy);
the same Mr. Naresh Goyal in the regulatory filings of M/s Tail Winds
Limited for years including 1997 has been declared to be an Arab
National.
The requirement to investigate and lift the veil becomes
paramount given the fact that in the past, when Mr. Goyal had sought
to participate in a proposed disinvestment/ privatisation of the
national airlines Air India, the Government of India had sought to
enquire into his antecedents as well as source of funding. At that
stage there were serious observations by the Intelligence Bureau (IB)
to the effect that Gulf Airways and Kuwait Airways (erstwhile
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
16/21
16
shareholders of M/s Tail Winds) were holding 20% shares in a
benami capacity.
Additionally, in the context of national security, it is also
pertinent to note that approval of the Ministry of Defence was never
sought in the entire process of consideration and examination of the
foreign investment proposal by Etihad Airways to invest into Jet
Airways. This failure is irrational and arbitrary given the fact that
several of domestic airports like Pune, Bagdogra, Chandigarh,
Srinagar, Agra, Goa, Jodhpur, etc are defence airfields, where Jet
Airways may be flying. Whereas, in terms of Government of India
policy, foreign airlines require prior approval from the Ministry of
Defence if they seek to use any defence airfield. Also, in the past,
security concerns in respect of investment by foreign companies as
well as their employment of foreign nationals in the civil aviation
sector have been found to be sensitive and have been rejected on
many occasions due to security concerns. The Petitioner believes
that by allowing an airline of the Gulf/ Middle East to invest in a
domestic airline, the Government of India is being a mute spectator
to a surrogate entry of foreign airline on defence airfields,
overlooking essential security concerns.
The Petitioner wrote to the Prime Minister of India on 29 th May,
2013 stating his concerns of the collusion and requesting his
intervention in relation to the illegalities. The same resulted in a
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
17/21
17
public outcry and concerns were voiced in the media in respect of
roles, responsibilities and functioning of those holding the highest
offices in the Government of India in respect of grant of the final
approval on 22.04.2013 for the negotiating mandate of the Bilateral.
The Prime Ministers Office was pleased to issue a Press Release on
02.07.2013 describing inter alia the Prime Ministers version of the
inter-ministerial discussions on the subject of bilateral. The Press
Release states that As far as the Bilateral Air Services Agreement
was concerned, the Cabinet Note was asked to be kept in abeyance
till responses on letters with complaints on the agreement and on
security concerns were received while drawing reference to the
PMO Note dated 13.06.2013 where under Para 2(ii) it is noted that
Subsequently, in the interest of wider consultations and greater
transparency, the Prime Minister directed that the matter be brought
to the Cabinet for a decision before operationalizing any agreements
that may be arrived at by the Government with the other party. This
fact may be incorporated in the Note and the Note may be brought to
the Cabinet and not to CCEA.
Therefore, in a departure from accepted practice, where in the
past only the approval of the Ministry of Civil Aviation was required to
operationalize any Bilateral/ MoU, the office of the Prime Minister
sought a wider consultative process through the cabinet prior to
operationalize the malafide, arbitrary and irrational Bilateral which
was contrary to the findings of the CAG, recommendations of the
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
18/21
18
Parliamentary Standing Committee and otherwise intended to
unjustly enrich a foreign airline and provide wrongful gains to a
private domestic airline, at the cost of national as well as public
interests. It is therefore, imperative that an independent investigation
under supervision of this Honble Court is directed and brought to its
logical end.
The Petitioner further seeks to bring to the attention of this
Honble Court the sequence of events demonstrating the
unprecedented haste and urgency shown by the various
departments and organs of the Government of India to give effect to
the foreign investment proposal made by Etihad Airways to invest in
equity of Jet Airways. Initially, the Foreign Investment Promotion
Board (i.e. FIPB) in its meeting on 14.06.2013 had expressed
serious reservations in respect of the non-compliance of the
investment proposal to the issues of substantial ownership and
effective control being continued to be held by Indian nationals. The
FIPB had emphasized on the requirement to carefully determine both
the issues. It is uncharacteristic for the Foreign Investment
Promotion Board (i.e. FIPB) to meet twice in a month, however the
FIPB met on 6 July, 2013 and then again on 29
July, 2013. As widely
reported in the media the validity of Jet-Etihad deal was to expire on
31st July, 2013. Furthermore, this deal was listed as an item to be
considered in the meeting much before the promoter and investor
filed their compliance (which was done only on 25 July, 2013).
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
19/21
19
Normally, the compliance of the entities involved ought to have been
examined and only then the meeting fixed. However, for reasons
best known to the Government they adopted a reverse strategy
thereby pushing the appraising agencies to appraise the deal in
undue haste leading to serious non-application of mind.
The Petitioner has been writing to the Prime Minister with
reference to the functioning of authorities, whose recent actions have
demonstrated the extent of collusion between the authorities and the
private beneficiaries. The authorities adopted a new found
consultative approach, where instead of rejecting the non-compliant
foreign investment application, they entered into dialogue to assist
Etihad Airways/ Jet Airways to provide multiple versions and
revisions of the inter-se agreements, while giving suggestions to
wean out issues by clever drafting. It is an abuse of authority
actionable under applicable criminal jurisprudence, when certain
departments raise objections on transfer of effective control on a
plain reading of the commercial cooperation agreements, instead of
rejecting the application per se, the parties are advised to execute
such agreements at a later date in order to avoid scrutiny and
rejection. The media reports suggest that the FIPB had on
29.07.2013 recommended the granting of a conditional approval to
the foreign investment by Etihad Airways in Jet Airways. The final
approving authority in the present case (consequent to extent of
investment involved) is the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
20/21
20
i.e. the CCEA. The collusion and criminal misconduct is further
evident from the fact that the authorities including the CCEA,
Competition Commission of India (CCI), SEBI are failing to consider
the Jet-Etihad transaction under an amended definition of control
which was notified on 22.08.2013. In the present petition, the
Petitioner is relying upon the sequence of events of consideration by
the public authorities of the FDI investment by Etihad in Jet Airways,
only for the purpose of establishing that the same warrant an
investigation under the aegis of this Honble Court, as it is apparent
that the transaction was intended for realization of wrongful gains to
the facilitator that assisted in the illegal execution of the bilateral. The
Petitioner in the present petition is not challenging the grant of FDI
approval by the CCEA to the investment by Etihad into Jet Airways.
The Petitioner specifically reserves its right to do so separately.
On 04.09.2013, media reports state that the MoU/ Bilateral
dated 24.04.2013 has received the post-facto approval of the Union
Cabinet in a meeting chaired by the Prime Minister. Even the
democratic framework under the Constitution of India does not permit
corrupt, collusive, illegal diversion of public funds from transfer of
national assets to be regularised through a vote by Cabinet
ministers.
Therefore, the recent events, including unprecedented haste,
lack of transparency, arbitrariness and bias in the consideration of
-
7/29/2019 Synopsis Writ Petition - West
21/21
21
the Jet-Etihad foreign investment clearly evidences the apparent
collusion and abuse of position by public servants, to subserve the
illegal grant of largesse (Bilateral) and unjust enrichment of foreign
airline Etihad Airways as facilitated by Tail Winds/ Naresh Goyal
through realisation of wrongful gains by guarantee of loan by Etihad
as well as receipt of premium for share purchase under foreign
investment; while ignoring the recommendations of the CAG,
Parliamentary Standing Committee, and while acting in concert to the
detriment of national airlines as well as domestic airports. The recent
events further demonstrate a lack of will and failure by the head of
the Government to exercise authority for taking remedial and
corrective actions. In view of the above, it is in the interest of justice,
nation, public and security that this Honble Court intervenes and
prohibits the Respondents from undertaking any further steps for
operationalization of the Bilateral and directs investigation under the
supervision of this Honble Court, and consequential prosecution of
those guilty in accordance with due process of law.