NEW DELHI: The Centre on Friday blamed the Supreme Court of passing various orders in the "forest matter" over the years contrary to the provisions of the statutes though such orders are binding on the government.

Additional Solicitor-General Vikas Singh made this statement before a three-Judge Bench comprising Chief Justice Y.K. Sabharwal, Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice S.H. Kapadia hearing the "forest matter," in particular an application relating to the appointment of members to the Forest Advisory Committee.

Stunned at this statement, the CJI told the ASG that the Supreme Court was dealing with the "forest matter" for over a decade and during this period none of the Attorney Generals, Solicitor Generals or the Additional Solicitor Generals, who had appeared in these cases had never pointed out that "we are passing orders contrary to the statutes." The Bench asked the counsel "do you mean to say that all these orders should be reversed."

The ASG replied "I say this with utmost responsibility. The Supreme Court can pass any order exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and we are bound by that. But the orders passed by the Supreme Court [in the forest matter] are contrary to the statutes. There is separation of powers between the various institutions. The Supreme Court cannot say that it will not respect the Executive or the other institutions."

The Bench retorted saying "No. It is said with utmost irresponsibility. Don't repeat what you are saying. It is blasphemous on your part to say this. Don't utter words that we are not respecting other institutions. You are trying to create an impression that the court was doing beyond what was permissible under the Constitution. We take strong exception to what you are saying which is nothing but contempt."

Unperturbed, the ASG said: "You cannot gag me like this by saying it is contempt. The Central Government has its own responsibility. What we have done is not less than what the Supreme Court has done. Hear me on this. I will satisfy you how the court had passed several orders contrary to the statutes."

On December 15, 2006, the Bench stayed a notification issued by the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests re-constituting the FAC ignoring the names suggested by the Central Empowered Committee.

In its order, the Bench said that the interim stay on re-constitution of the FAC would continue till the Centre filed an affidavit indicating whether there was any guideline on such appointments and if so would place a copy of it before the court in two weeks. The Bench granted a week's time thereafter to the CEC and amicus curiae to respond.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail