The Kurdukar commission, probing the Dabhol Power Project fiasco, would on Friday give its verdict on the controversial issue of its jurisdiction to hear matters pertaining to Central approvals for the multi-crore project of Dabhol Power Company.

Justice S P Kurdukar, retired Supreme Court judge, conducting the probe, had reserved his order until February 7 after arguments by the Union and Maharashtra governments and various other respondents concluded on January 14.

The commission was set up on November 7, 2001, by the state government to go into the validity of power purchase agreement, the circumstances in which it was negotiated, cancelled and re-negotiated and the role played by various persons in decision making.

It will also probe the circumstances in which Phase Two of the project was made binding. Justice Kurdukar has also reserved until Friday his decision to take consequential action on the secretary or the joint secretary to the ministry of power for filing an affidavit on government's stand without seeking Cabinet approval.

The commission had on January 9 expressed dissatisfaction over the Union government's written submission signed by a desk officer who was junior in rank. Justice Kurdukar observed that it should have been signed by the secretary to the power ministry after obtaining due authorisation from the Cabinet.

The Centre has opposed the jurisdiction of Enron probe commission to inquire into the executive decisions taken by the Centre under various central statutes.

The Union government opposed the jurisdiction of the Enron probe commission to inquire into the executive decisions taken by the Centre under various central statutes.

The Centre said the subject matter of the Commission must confine to matters pertaining to Maharashtra government. The enlargement of the scope of commission of inquiry by the state government was impermissible in view of the constitution limitation, it said.

A commission of inquiry could not transgress into the field occupied by the Centre while examining matters relevant to the concurrent list. If that is so, then it shall clearly infract proviso to article 162 of the constitution. Thus, the state did not have powers to constitute an inquiry with regard to matters wherein the Centre had exercised executive powers.

The Centre submitted in an affidavit that the state government was not competent to issue the notification of November 7, 2001, appointing Kurdukar commission to the extent of probing the acts of Central government on the ground of failure of governance.

Electricity and matters pertaining to environment were in the concurrent list. If the Union exercised executive power with respect to these entries, the state's power to exercise executive power in these fields stood displaced to that extent, the affidavit pointed out.

Former chief minister Sharad Pawar and former chief secretary to Maharashtra government N Raghunathan opposed the jurisdiction of Kurdukar commission of inquiry, while Manohar Joshi and Gopinath Munde, former chief minister and deputy chief minister respectively, took a contrary stand.