Jai Raj Bhati
The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court on 7th January 2025 initiated suo motu contempt proceedings against the well-known law firm Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co. for allegedly misquoting its 2010 judgment in a legal notice. The issue arose in the context of the Sawalkote Hydroelectric Power Project (HEP), where the firm, representing the Sawalkote Consortium, issued a notice to the Chairman & Managing Director (CMD) of NHPC Ltd. asserting that the 2010 ruling upheld the validity of the consortium’s contract.
Justice Rahul Bharti, while taking cognizance of this matter, directed, “this Court suo-moto takes cognizance of the contents of the said legal notice issued by Sharadul Amarchand Mangaldass & Co., New Delhi for the sake of proceeding against it for the contempt of Court, for which purpose a notice is directed to be issued to Sharadul Amarchand Mangaldass & Co., New Delhi to appear and explain its position in the context of legal notice dated 18.04.2022 issued by it to Chairman & Managing Director (CMD), NHPC Ltd on behalf of Sawalkote Consortium.”
The dispute stemmed from a petition filed by M/s Sawalkote Prosjektutvikling AS (SPAS), a Norwegian company incorporated as a special-purpose vehicle (SPV), challenging the communications and agreements between the Jammu and Kashmir Power Development Corporation (JKPDC) and the National Hydro-Electric Power Corporation (NHPC). SPAS, acting on behalf of the Sawalkote Consortium, claimed that the NHPC’s Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated January 3, 2021, violated its legal rights. Initially, the consortium consisted of NCC International AS and Hochtief Aktiengesellschaft, later joined by Hindustan Construction Company (HCC) and Ozaltin Construction Trade & Industry Company. The crux of the controversy was NHPC’s takeover of the project, allegedly in contravention of the 2010 judgment.
In the original ruling, the High Court had quashed a government order that had arbitrarily cancelled an earlier agreement with the consortium for executing the Sawalkote HEP. However, the Court had been clear in stating that it would not interfere in contractual disputes, noting in paragraph 12 that such matters fell under private law and were beyond the scope of judicial review. Despite this, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas sent a legal notice on April 18, 2022, to NHPC, asserting that the 2010 judgment validated and upheld the enforceability of the consortium’s contract. The notice accused NHPC of violating the Court’s decision by issuing global tenders for the project and contended that such actions amounted to contempt of court.
Justice Bharti, upon reviewing the legal notice, found it riddled with deliberate misinterpretations of the judgment. He remarked, “Para 18, 20, 23, 27, 28 & 32 of the legal notice dated 18.04.2022 issued by Sharadul Amarchand Mangaldass & Co. (a law firm) through its partner Ritu Bhalla carry and make a misconceived and perverted reference to the judgment dated 01.02.2010 of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and, therefore, the said misquoting of the judgment of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir by none else than law firm is a serious matter to be taken with due seriousness as prima-facie amounting to a criminal contempt undermining the administration of justice and the authority by this Court and its judgment.”
Finding prima facie grounds for contempt, the Court directed the Registrar Judicial, Jammu to issue a notice summoning Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas to appear and explain its position. The Court further examined the merits of the petition filed by SPAS and ruled that it was not maintainable, as the petitioner lacked locus standi to represent the entire Sawalkote Consortium. Since SPAS was merely an SPV and the consortium comprised multiple parties, it could not unilaterally assert claims without their participation. Justice Bharti noted, “As a matter of fact, the petitioner-SPAS is being referred as a leader of the Consortium thereby admitting that the constituents of the Sawalkote Consortium are indispensable from being left out to join the petitioner-SPAS in its purported status of leader for the present writ petition.” Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
Case Name :- M/S Sawalkote Prosjektutvikling (SPAS) v. UT of Jammu & Kashmir
Case Number :- WP(C) No. 237/2024
Bench :- Justice Rahul Bharti