India, US must collaborate more on space research, says NASA scientist

New Delhi, Jun 12: The Supreme Court on Friday asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to convene a meeting of the Finance Ministry and RBI officials over the weekend to decide whether interest incurred on EMIs during the moratorium period can be charged by banks.

A bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.R. Shah queried Mehta as the court was concerned since the Centre has deferred loan for three months.

"Then how can interest of these 3 months be added?" the apex bench asked. Mehta replied: "I need to sit down with the RBI officials and have a meeting."

SBI's counsel, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, intervened during the proceedings and said "all banks are of the view that interest cannot be waived for a six month EMI moratorium period".

"We need to discuss it with the RBI," insisted Rohatgi.

Justice Bhushan then asked Mehta to convene a meeting of the RBI and Finance Ministry officials over the weekend, and listed the matter for further hearing on June 17.

The top court, during the hearing, indicated that it was not considering a complete waiver of interest but was only concerned that postponement of interest shouldn't accrue further interest on it.

After the RBI said the waiver of interest charges on EMIs during moratorium will lead to loss of 1 per cent of the nation's GDP, the top court had earlier asked the Finance Ministry to reply, whether the interest could be waived or it would continue during the moratorium period.

The top court said these are not normal times, and it is a serious issue, as on one hand moratorium is granted and then, the interest is charged on loans during this period.

"There are two issues in this (matter). No interest during the moratorium period and no interest on interest," said Justice Bhushan. The observation from the bench came on a petition by Gajendra Sharma, in which he sought a direction to declare portion of the RBI's March 27 notification as ultra vires to the extent it charged interest on the loan amount during the moratorium period.

In an unprecedented crisis despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi assuring the continuation of essential services like food and groceries, online marketplaces like Flipkart and Amazon along with delivery platforms like Bigbasket, Grofers and FreshToHomes hit a major blockade on Wednesday as local authorities shut warehouses and sent delivery boys back, even harassed them.

Millions of people across cities were left helpless at homes as essential items like fruits and vegetables, dairy and milk, meat and fish etc did not reach their doors despite placing orders well in advance. Later, the orders went dry.

While Grofers' warehouse in Faridabad was closed by the local law enforcement agencies, Bigbasket complained that the police stopped its delivery partners and "some of them were even beaten up by for no fault of theirs".

"We are not operational due to restrictions imposed by local authorities on movement of goods in spite of clear guidelines provided by central authorities to enable essential services. We are working with the authorities to be back soon,' Bigbasket tweeted.

In a statement to IANS, Bigbasket said that it will help to have better coordination between the Centre and state, and between the state and local police to "ensure that our delivery vans and bikes don't get stopped by the police. Bigbasket and bb daily are not taking new orders".

Furious people stormed the social media platforms, writing their plight to NITI Aayog CEO Amitabh Kant on Twitter.

"Sir, all e-commerce are down. Believe me I tried everything (Grofers, Bigbasket, Flipkart, Amazon, Big Bazaar), no delivery till 31st March or Server Down or No Service. Need to think how we can enable them through digital India," tweeted one user.

Kant tweeted back to Bigbasket: "They should give me specifics - State & location. I will act on it by getting in touch with concerned authorities & sorting it out. Govt guidelines exempt them. We will ensure that citizens are not impacted".

Kant also responded to Grofers: "Cold storages & Warehouses as well as delivery of all essentials goods including food, pharma thru E-Commerce are exempted under MHA order. I have spoken to CS & DGP, Haryana . They have taken immediate action to ensure that supply chains efficiently function for the citizens".

The subscription-based hyperlocal delivery startup FreshToHome sent messages to its customers, saying that despite the government declaring food delivery as essential, "we are facing hardships in continuing our operations".

"Please bear with us as we are working hard to unblock local authority hurdles," said the FreshToHome team.

Reports later surfaced that the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has initiated talks with the state Chief Secretaries asking them not to restrict movement of people engaged in home delivery of essential items, mentioned in the list of exempted items circulated by the Home Ministry.

Meanwhile, Flipkart said it has temporarily suspended its operations and services - including grocery items. The marketplace has decided to halt all orders from March 25 for all three supply chains -- groceries, non-large goods and large items.

"Flipkart has temporarily suspended orders as we assess the possibilities of operating in the lockdown. We are prioritising the safety of our delivery executives and seeking the support of the local governments and police authorities to meet the needs of our customers as they stay home during this lockdown," Rajneesh Kumar, Chief Corporate Affairs Officer, Flipkart, said in a statement.

E-commerce giant Amazon said the company has to "temporarily stop taking orders and disable shipments for lower-priority products.

"For all pending customer orders on lower-priority products, we are reaching out to customers and giving them a choice to cancel their orders, and receive a refund for prepaid items," said the company.

Witnessing a surge in demand, supermarket chain Biz Bazaar entered the fray, with launching doorstep delivery services in major cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru and Gurugram.

However, within no time, Big Bazaar was flooded with calls, forcing the company to issue a statement, saying that "In light of the recent announcement, we are receiving an unprecedented number of requests for doorstep delivery. There could be a delay due to the restrictions on movements".

Already battling massive surge in demand, the online delivery platforms faced other issues too, including zero access to several high-rises across the country which have gone under complete lockdown with all entry and exit gates locked.

New Delhi, Jun 18: Vodafone Idea on Thursday told the Supreme Court that it has incurred Rs 1 lakh crore losses as it insisted it is not in a position to furnish bank guarantees.

A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, S. Abdul Nazeer, and M.R. Shah, taking up the adjusted gross revenue (AGR) matter through video conferencing, directed the telecom companies to submit their financial documents and books for the last 10 years.

Asking Vodafone if it was a foreign company, the bench said that how can the company say it would not furnish any bank guarantee.

"What if you fly away overnight in future without paying anything?" it asked.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Vodafone Idea, denied his client is a completely foreign firm and cited before the bench its tie-ups and investments.

Vodafone owes over Rs 58,000 crore as AGR dues and so far, has paid close to Rs 7,000 crore.

Rohatgi contended before the court that the telecom company is in a tough situation, and cannot furnish any fresh bank guarantee, as profits have eluded the company in past many quarters. He submitted before the bench that Rs 15,000 crore bank guarantees are lying with the government, and his client's losses are over Rs 1 lakh crore.

"I cannot offer any more surety," he informed the bench.

Justice Mishra noted that this is public money and these dues should be recovered. "Do not tell us that you will pay if you were to make profits... the money must come," he noted.

Justice Shah observed that the telecom industry is the only industry which earned during the Covid-19 pandemic. "After all, this money will be used for public welfare", he said.

Rohatgi argued that his client would have to fold up if orders were issued to clear dues tomorrow. "11,000 employees will have to go without notice, as we cannot pay them," he added.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Bharti Airtel, contended before the court that out of Rs 21,000 crore AGR dues, the company has already deposited a sum of Rs 18,000 crore.

He argued that his client has given a bank guarantee, in excess of demand, to DoT, and supported the proposal for phased repayment of remaining AGR dues. He insisted that the company needs to sit down with the government and calculate the dues. Airtel owes Rs 25,976 crore after paying Rs 18,000 crore, as per the government.

Senior advocate Arvind Datar, representing Tata Telecom, informed the bench that his client has paid Rs 6,504 crore in AGR dues so far, and furnishing a bank guarantee may adversely impact investments in the sector.

The total AGR dues are close to Rs 1.5 lakh crore.

The top court will now take up the matter in the third week of July.