Hyderabad: Nimmagadda Prasad, representing the Ras Al Khaimah (RAK) Group in signing an MoU with composite Andhra Pradesh for the setting up of the VANPIC project, submitted before the High Court here that CBI is the only entity that raised objections to the deal.
No other entity did so vis-à-vis the Vadarevu and Nizampatnam Industrial Corridor (VANPIC) project, for which land was acquired in 2008, the court was told on Thursday.
During the hearing on the third consecutive day, Prasad, through his counsel Niranjan Reddy, submitted his arguments against the CBI charge-sheet before Justice Ujjal Bhuyan of Telangana High Court. He filed the petition seeking to delete his name from the case lodged by CBI vis-a-vis Vanpic.
Vanpic was related to YS Jaganmohan Reddy's quid pro quo cases.
Prasad's contention was that after 2008, ever since the agreement was made and till date, the project is in existence, but no one other than CBI raised any questions about the conditions in relation to Vanpic.
We had acquired 13,000 acres for this project by paying our own money (RAK) of around Rs 530 crore. No Rythu or land owner had objected to the land acquisition. We paid handsomely to the land owners, more than what the government had notified. All the land is patta land. Nowadays, acquiring even 100 acres of land is leading to several complications and protests. But, we negotiated and paid the full money to the land-owners. How could the CBI object to this and term it fraudulent when we paid money from our own pockets,” Niranjan Reddy submitted before the court on behalf of his client.
CBI's argument was that Nimmagadda had in connivance with Jaganmohan Reddy acquired huge swathes of land in the name of port development with the help of the then government headed by YS Rajasheker Reddy. Refuting this, counsel submitted that the government did not give any benefit to Nimmagadda. No land was given free of cost. Then, how can the CBI attribute the deal as a quid pro quo, he asked.
Moreover, our client Nimmagadda Prasad’s fairness is clearly evident in that he only rejected the government's proposal to acquire 28,000 acres. Prasad asked the government to exclude the lands belonging to the government -- assigned, forest and other lands except patta lands -- from the notification. If he aimed to play a fraud, he could have acquired all the land,” counsel argued.
Either the land owners or RAK or the state government or subsequent governments would have complained about the deal if the land was gained fraudulently by misleading the cabinet. But, no such complaint came up till now and the project is still in existence, counsel said.
