In the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow
Writ petition No- of 2012 (M/B)
Dr Nutan Thakur Petitioners
Versus
Union of India Respondent
Index
S No | Description of documents relied upon | Page No | |
From | To | ||
1. | List of Dates and Events (separate) | Separate | |
2. | Memo of Writ Petition | ||
3. | Annexure No 1 Copy of the allegations made by Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan dated 05/10/2012 | ||
4. | Annexure No 2 Copy of the point wise point reply by the DLF company | ||
5. | Annexure No 3 Copy of the two news articles refuting all the explanations put forth by the DLF company | ||
6. | Annexure No 4 Copy of the representation dated 09/10/2012 sent by the petitioner to the Hon’ble Prime Minister | ||
7. | Para – Photo Identity a copy of Petitioner’s Passport | ||
8. | Affidavit |
Lucknow Asok Pande
Dated-09/10/2012 Counsel for Petitioner
# 94154-65438
In the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow
Writ petition No- of 2012 (M/B)
Dr Nutan Thakur Petitioners
Versus
Union of India Respondent
LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS
S No Date Event
- 05/10/2012 Allegations made against Sri Robert
Vadra by Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri
Prashant Bhushan - 06/10/2012 DLF company and Sri Robert Vadra
refute all these allegations - 08/10/2012 Various news articles come dismissing
the explanations made by DLF company - 09/10/2012 The petitioner sends a representation to
the Hon’ble Prime Minister requesting
him to decide over it and to get an
enquiry conducted in this matter
The allegations made are extremely important and serious in nature and need to be immediately enquired into, as explained in the subsequent Writ Petition.
Hence, this Writ Petition.
Lucknow Asok Pande
Dated-09/10/2012 Counsel for Petitioner
# 94154-65438
In the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow
Writ petition No- of 2012 (PIL- Civil)
Dr Nutan Thakur, aged about 38 years, w/o Amitabh Thakur r/o 5/426, Viram Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow ———- Petitioner
Versus
Union of India through Home Secretary, Government of India, New Delhi
Union of India through Finance Secretary, Government of India, New Delhi
Central Bureau of Investigation through Director, CBI, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi —————- Respondents
Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice and His other Hon’ble companion Judges of the aforesaid Court:
The humble petition of the above named petitioner most respectfully begs to submit as under
That by means of this petition being filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays before the Hon’ble Court to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent, viz. Union of Union through the Principal Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office to decide over her representation (Annexure No 4) on the merit of facts as regards conducting an enquiry in the matter as presented by the petitioner to the respondent’s office through her letter dated 09/10/2012 as regards allegations of financial impropriety made by Sri Arvind Kejriwal, a civil activist and Sri Prashant Bhushan, an eminent advocate in the Hon’ble Supreme Court against Sri Robert Vadra son of Sri Rajendra Vadra and son-in-law of Ms Sonia Gandhi, resident of 10, Janpath, New Delhi- 110001 being attached as Annexure No 1 within a reasonable period, say 30 days of receiving the representation and the order of this Hon’ble Court (whichever is received later) and to accordingly get an enquiry conducted in the various extremely serious allegations being made in Annexure No 1 and as explained in details by Annexure No 3, within a reasonable period, say six months and to take suitable actions as per the provisions of law.
The petitioner declares that she has not filed any other Writ petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Hon’ble Court either at Allahabad or its Lucknow bench pertaining to the subject matter and/ or for the relief prayed for in the instant writ petition. It is further declared that in respect of the same subject, no caveat notice has been received by the petitioner
That the petitioner is a social activist and freelance journalist having an urge to positively contribute to the society in all possible ways. She presents this Writ petition in her individual capacity as an affected party who wants suitable action to be taken as per her representation sent to the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India.
That recently on 05/10/2012, Sri Arvind Kejriwal, Civil activist and Anti-corruption crusader and Sri Prashant Bhushan, an eminent advocate in the Hon’ble Supreme Court raised a few questions of propriety as regards the business deals between Sri Robert Vadra, son-in-law of Ms Sonia Gandhi, President of the Indian National Congress and the DLF company. The allegations titled “Robert Vadra acquires properties worth hundreds of crores from nothing, What is the source of these funds?” say-“In the last 4 years, Robert Vadra has gone on a property buying binge and has purchased at least 31 properties mostly in and around New Delhi, which even at the time of their purchase were worth several hundred crores. An analysis of the balance sheets and audit reports of 5 companies set up by him (and owned exclusively by him and his mother) on or after 1/11/2007 show that the total share capital of these companies was just Rs 50 lakhs and these companies together had no income from any legitimate business activity (except by way of interest derived from interest free loans obtained from DLF). Yet during 2007-2010 they have acquired properties which were worth well over Rs 300 crores even at their time of acquisition and are worth more than Rs 500 crore as of today. The ostensible seed money for this acquisition is shown to have come from unsecured interest free loans from DLF Ltd (over 65 crore). The bulk of the properties are also purchased from DLF at a price which is shown far below the market price. Thus 7 flats in Magnolia apartments in DLF Gurgaon are purchased for a total of Rs 5.2 crores by Vadra’s companies when the market price of each flat at the time of acquisition was well over 5 crore and today its price is between 10 to 15 crore rupees per flat. Similarly a 10,000 sq feet apartment in DLF Aralias (Gurgaon) is shown to be purchased for Rs 89 lakhs when its market price at the time of purchase in 2010 was 20 crore rupees and today is more than 30 crore rupees. Not just that, a stake of 50% share in DLF owned hotel in Saket (DLF Hilton Garden Inn) is shown to be purchased for Rs 32 crore when the market value was well over Rs 150 crore.” The relevant pages of this accusation are being attached as Annexure No 1.
That from this the following important questions were raised-
“1. Why should DLF give large unsecured interest free loans to Robert Vadra?
2. Why should DLF sell its properties to Vadra at throwaway prices and on the basis of funds obtained by Vadra from DLF itself?
3. It is well known that DLF has been given 350 acres of land by Haryana govt for the development of Magnolia project in Gurgaon (where Vadra was allocated 7 apartments) and has been given various other properties and benefits by the Congress governments in Haryana and Delhi. Is that the quid pro quo for DLF giving Vadra the seed money for the purchase of these massive properties worth hundreds of crores?
4. It is clear that there is a lot of unaccounted black money invested in these properties of Vadra. What is the source of these funds? Are illicit funds of the Congress party being funnelled into this property buying spree by the son-in-law of the dynasty?
5. The above acquisition of properties is only what has come to light from the documents submitted to ROC itself, and maybe just the tip of the iceberg. Preliminary information indicates that there are many other properties purchased by him. It’s significant that 6 new companies have also been registered by him in 2012.”
- That the two people said- “Prima facie the facts above show commission of offences under the prevention of corruption act as well offences under the Income Tax Act. Why are these ostensible offenses not being investigated?”
That this statement issued by Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan was vehemently denied by DLF Company. The point-by-point rebuttal being made by the DLF company as Annexure No 2.
That the DLF company said- “We would like to state that the business relationship of DLF with Mr Robert Vadra or his companies, has been in his capacity as an individual entrepreneur, on a completely transparent and at an arm’s length basis. Our business relationship has been conducted to the highest standards of ethics and transparency, as has been our business practices, all around.” It said- “We wish to categorically state that the DLF has given NO unsecured loans to Mr. Vadra or any of his companies. An amount of Rs. 65 crores was given as business advances for the purchase of land as per standard industry practice comprising of the two transactions” with M/s Skylight Hospitality Pvt Ltd and M/S Skylight Group of companies belonging to Sri Robert Vadra.
That similarly, the DLF statement said- “Since no unsecured loans were provided by DLF the question of acquiring the said properties from DLF loans does not exist. It is not unusual for parties which sell land to DLF to choose to reinvest the consideration received or part thereof in projects being developed by DLF.” DLF further clarified its position as regards the various Residential Properties purchased by Sri Vadra in Aralias apartment, Magnolias apartments, Capital Greens project. Thus the DLF said- “There is no question of offering, let alone selling, Mr Vadra or his group companies any property at a throwaway price. The allegation that 7 apartments in Magnolias were sold for Rs. 5.2 crores only is also completely baseless. At NO stage was a property ever sold to the Skylight group below the then offered price to all customers.”
That about the allegations related with Saket Hilton Hotel, it said- “As part of its publicly stated objective of exiting the non core business of hotels, DLF, based on independent valuation, arrived at an enterprise value of Rs. 150 crores for the Saket Hilton Hotel. It was agreed to sell an equity stake of 50% at the above enterprise value. The enterprise value comprised of Rs. 80 crores of debt (at an interest rate of 12% pa) and an equity value of Rs. 70 crores. Accordingly, for a 50% equity stake in the hotel, a sum of Rs. 35 crores was contributed by Skylight Group.”
That regarding any kind of quid pro quo, DLF categorically denied by saying- “DLF vehemently denies any quid pro quo in its transactions with Mr Vadra and his group of companies. DLF is engaged in Real estate development in Haryana for over 40 years and has successfully implemented large projects by purchasing land from individual land owners directly at fair market prices and developing the same in strict compliance of all rules, regulations and applicable laws.”
That it also explained its position as regards Magnolias project is located is part of the Phase V project in DLF City, Gurgaon. DLF said- “It may be clarified that DLF secured the project on its own merits by fulfilling the eligibility criteria through a competitive bidding process and NOT through a discretionary allotment by the Haryana Government as alleged. We further state that DLF has not been allotted any lands by the State Governments of Haryana, Rajasthan or Delhi.”
That DLF also made it clear that- “All business transactions between DLF and Mr Vadra and his group of companies have been conducted with complete transparency and are fully accounted for as per the applicable laws and accounting standards. There is no question of utilization of unaccounted black money or illicit funds as alleged. We categorically and vehemently reject this allegation.” It concluded by saying- “We trust we have clarified the issue adequately and with the facts, as they are. The allegations raised against DLF are therefore completely baseless and untrue. DLF hopes that with this clarification, controversies of these baseless allegations stands cleared.”
That Sri Robert Vadra also vehemently denied these allegations by saying- “”I am a private law abiding citizen who has been engaged in business over the last 21 years. The allegations levelled against me by Shri Kejriwal and Shri Bhushan are utterly false, entirely baseless and defamatory. My business transactions are fully reflected in financial statements filed before appropriate government authorities in compliance with the law. They are available in the public domain to anyone interested in knowing the truth.” Sri Vadra thus concluded- “I am saddened by the attempt of Shri Kejriwal and Shri Bhushan to deliberately misrepresent numbers contained in my financial statements, manufacture lies and malign my family in order to gain cheap publicity for them and for the launch of their political party.”
That to these clarifications/statements by DLF company and Sri Robert Vadra, Sri Kejriwal has reacted by saying- “DLF has issued a response. It is full of half truths and lies. A lot of information has been suppressed. Robert Vadra has questioned our motives that is not important. He has not replied to the questions that we have raised.”
That meanwhile the matter is being widely discussed in all public forum and has become the most talked after debate of India.
That despite specific denials by the DLF company and Sri Vadra as regards the allegations leveled by Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan, some of the basic questions remain completely unanswered. These unanswered questions have been raised in great details in many news articles. The petitioner presents here only two such articles, one from the news website firstpost.com- “DLF and Vadra may have misled us on the advance” by Sri Vivek Kaul dated 08/10/2012 (http://www.firstpost.com/politics/money-for-nothing-dlf-vadra-alibi-on-land-deals-is-hogwash-482370.html) and another from The Hindu- “Behind Robert Vadra’s fortune, a maze of questions” by Ms Shalini Singh. These news articles are being attached as Annexure No 3.
That despite not being an expert in company affairs, corporate matters, finance and economics, the petitioner sufficiently understands as everyone else in this country that there are very few fortunate people on this earth who invest Rs. 5 lakh in a business and get to acquire Rs. 500 crore worth of property within a few years. At the same time many technical, legal and financial issues raised in these two news articles are such that seem to need a detailed enquiry by the competent authorities/agencies of the Government of India
That hence, the petitioner has made a representation dated 09/10/2012 where she has made following requests-
Since despite the specific denials by Sri Robert Vadra and the DLF company as regards the allegations made by Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan, many a questions are still being said to be completely unanswered as can be seen from a perusal of Annexure No A3, hence it becomes imperative for the Government of India to enquire into the entire matter as alleged by Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan through whatever appropriate authorities it deems fit and capable for enquiring into these allegations
Since the entire country is baffled on how a person’s assets (who incidentally happens to be the son-in-law of the President of the political party that is in power in the Center and in the three States, Haryana, Rajasthan and Delhi where allegations are being directed) can grow from Rs. 5 lakhs to Rs. 500 crore, hence it seems to be the duty of the Government of India to officially explain the facts before the people of this country as to how and why exactly this happened
A copy of the representation is being attached as Annexure No 4.
That at the same time the petitioner feels that her representation would not be given any consideration as long as the respondent is not suitably directed by a competent and mighty Institution like this Hon’ble Court. She fears that her voice would not be heard and would be completely ignored as long as it is not backed and duly supported by this Hon’ble Court. This can be easily seen from the statement made the Hon’ble Finance Minister Sri P. Chidambaram in this regards- “I think those who made their allegations have made their statement, the company concerned has made a statement and the individual concerned has made a statement. Now beyond that, I have no facts and unless there is a specific allegation of quid pro quo or corruption, I am afraid private transactions cannot and ought not to be allowed to questioned on the basis of imputations and insinuations”, thus refusing even to consider the matter and to make an enquiry into the various serious allegations being made here. Similarly, Sri Sharad Pawar, Hon’ble Agriculrure Minister of India is also said to have spoken-““Of late, this is becoming a trend that anyone levels allegations, then keeps mum and later asks the government to conduct a judicial probe. But in such cases, anyone can approach court. Kejriwal can also go to court”. From these statements made by this Hon’ble Ministers in the Government of India, it can be easily seen that the matter requires the direct intervention of the Hon’ble Court itself and in the prevailing circumstances, the petitioner is left with no other option than to approach the Hon’ble Court with this Writ Petition to ask for certain prayers as enumerated below.
That the petitioner’s photograph and Identity proof in the form of Passport has been enclosed along with.
GROUNDS
Because the allegations made on 05/10/2012 by Sri Arvind Kejriwal, Civil activist and Anti-corruption crusader and Sri Prashant Bhushan, an eminent advocate in the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as presented in Annexure No 1, have raised a few important questions of propriety as regards the business deals between Sri Robert Vadra, son-in-law of Ms Sonia Gandhi, President of the Indian National Congress and the DLF company.
Because though Sri Robert Vadra and the DLF company have come up their explanations as regards these allegations where they have clearly rebutted these allegations as malafide, mischievous and misleading, yet there are a very large number of unanswered questions as can be seen from the two news articles presented by the petitioner as Annexure No 3
Because due to these unanswered questions, there seems to be an imminent need for a thorough enquiry into the entire matter and allegations made against Sri Vadra and DLF by Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan
Because the petitioner has made a representation to the Hon’ble Prime Minister of India to kindly get the matter enquired through competent and empowered authorities and to take suitable action accordingly
Because the petitioner’s representation would not be given any consideration as long as the respondent is not suitably directed by a competent and mighty Institution like this Hon’ble Court. Her voice would not be heard and would be completely ignored as long as it is not backed and duly supported by this Hon’ble Court
Because even the Hon’ble Finance Minister Sri P. Chidambaram is said to have stated- “I think those who made their allegations have made their statement, the company concerned has made a statement and the individual concerned has made a statement. Now beyond that, I have no facts and unless there is a specific allegation of quid pro quo or corruption, I am afraid private transactions cannot and ought not to be allowed to questioned on the basis of imputations and insinuations”, thereby refuting any enquiry in this matter.
Because the entire matter seems to need an independent enquiry to bring out the truth as regards these serious allegations
PRAYER
Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to-
Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent, viz. Union of Union through the Principal Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office to decide over her representation (Annexure No 4) on the merit of facts as regards conducting an enquiry in the matter as presented by the petitioner to the respondent’s office through her representation dated 09/10/2012 as regards allegations of financial impropriety made by Sri Arvind Kejriwal, a civil activist and Sri Prashant Bhushan, an eminent advocate in the Hon’ble Supreme Court against Sri Robert Vadra son of Sri Rajendra Vadra and son-in-law of Ms Sonia Gandhi, resident of 10, Janpath, New Delhi- 110001 being attached as Annexure No 1 within a reasonable period, say 30 days of receiving the representation and the order of this Hon’ble Court (whichever is received later) and to accordingly get an enquiry conducted in the various extremely serious allegations being made in Annexure No 1 and as explained in details by Annexure No 3, within a reasonable period, say six months and to take suitable actions as per the provisions of law.
Lucknow Dr Nutan Thakur
Dated- 09/10/2012 Petitioner in Person # 94155-34525
In the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow
Writ petition No- of 2012 (M/B)
Dr Nutan Thakur Petitioners
Versus
Union of India Respondent
AFFIDAVIT
I, Nutan Thakur, aged about 39 years, w/o Sri Amitabh Thakur R/O 5/426, Viram Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, religion Hinduism, profession- Social activist and journalist, the deponent, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under-
- That the deponent is the sole petitioner in the above noted petition and as such he is fully conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, deposed to hereunder
- That the contents of the paragraphs 1 to 20 of the Writ petition are true to my personal knowledge, based on documents and records and believed to be true or are based on legal advice.
- That the contents of Annexure No 01 ro 04 of the Writ Petition are true copies of their original documents.
Place Lucknow (Nutan Thakur)
Date- 09/10/2012 Deponent
VERIFICATION
I, the deponent above named, do hereby verify that the contents of paragraphs 1 to 3 above this Affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge and belief. No part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed. So, help me God
Signed and verified this the day of 2012 at Lucknow
Deponent
Identification
I identify the deponent, on the basis of records produced before me, who has signed before me.
Advocate
Solemnly affirmed me on at am/pm by the deponent Nutan Thakur, who has been identified by Sri clerk to Sri , Advocate, high court, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow
I have satisfied myself by examining the deponent that she understands the contents of this Affidavit which have been read over and explained to him by me
Oath Commissioner
Dear Dr. Nutan Thakur,
You have really done the righteous job.
Be assured of justice in the right perspective because this High Court, is the same, which never hesitated to nullify the election of Madam Indira Gandhi & your writ undoubtedly is most meaningful in the interest of nation at large & must be landmark in the days to come, in the legal history of India.
We send you our best wishes through The India Post for your sensibility in this context–dr.amritgaur
Dear Dr. Nutan Thakur,
You have really done the righteous job.
Be assured of justice in the right perspective because this High Court, is the same, which never hesitated to nullify the election of Madam Indira Gandhi & your writ undoubtedly is most meaningful in the interest of nation at large & must be landmark in the days to come.
We send you our best wishes through The India Post for your sensibility in this context–dr.amritgaur