While Samaraditya Pal, counsel for Tata Motors, expressed concern at the safety of the company’s assets at the factory site, Advocate-General Anindya Mitra assured the court that 591 police personnel had been maintaining vigil there.
Counsel said even if the Act were considered valid, the West Bengal government’s approach to implementing it was unreasonable. No joint inventory had been taken of the assets, plant and machinery at the factory site. As a result, the question of compensation Tata Motors was entitled to could not be settled. “Who is there to ensure that I am granted the compensation I am entitled to under this law?”
Counsel said the government’s action in taking possession of the land “was disproportionate to what was required in the circumstances.”
Section 4 (3) of the Act conferred some discretion on the District Magistrate to take steps and use such force as might be necessary to take possession of the land, he said but questioned the justification for use of force in this situation.