responded to by any of the authorities. Petitioners also filed an RTIapplication with ONGC but the request for information was denied. Acopy of the application and its response is also annexed to this petition.(Annexure P14 colly).T
The petitioner is a financial expert and a lawyer. He has filedseveral notable public interest petitions that have unearthed corruptionand financial irregularities. His PIL against Cogentrix prevented a lossworth approximately rupees 30,000 crores to the exchequer, and oneagainst Prasar Bharti benefited theorganization by about Rs. 20 crores.It was the complaint of the petitioner in the 2G spectrum scam thateventually led to the registration of the FIR by the CBI, as has beennoted by this Hon’ble Courtin the 2G case.T
Respondent No. 1 is the Union of India that have allowed the abovescam to take place and have now officially given final clearance to theCairn-Vedanta dealin violation of the public trust doctrine.RespondentNo. 1 has also given irregular and arbitrary extensions of time periodbeyond that provided in the PSC to private firms for the exploration of oilin various oilfields. These extensions have resulted in a loss worthbillions of dollars because of discoveries made during the extendedperiod in areas that had a very high probability of oil discovery.
Respondent No. 2 is the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation of India(hereinafter the ‘ONGC’). ONGC is anoil and gas companyowned and