The Hindu : Front Page : Apex court pulls up High Court

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Monday, Oct 01, 2007
ePaper

Front Page

Front Page

Apex court pulls up High Court

Legal Correspondent

“It ought not to have issued directions on bandh”

There can’t be any peaceful cessation of work: apex court
Everything has to be dealt with an iron hand: Bench

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Sunday pulled up the Madras High Court for giving certain directions in addition to the instructions given by Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary on a bandh called by the DMK and its allies.

A Bench, comprising Justices B.N. Agrawal and P.P. Naolekar, said “having come to the conclusion that it was only a bandh, the High Court ought not to have issued certain directions in addition to those given by the Chief Secretary as if to facilitate the holding of a bandh.”

Law and order

Appearing for the petitioner, the AIADMK, counsel Guru Krishnakumar said: “Our grievance is that the High Court, having given a finding that it is a bandh, had refused to interfere with the bandh. The State owes a duty to maintain law and order, for it can’t create a ghost and try to destroy it.”

The Bench said, “The High Court has committed a mistake. In the teeth of the law laid down by this court, the High Court had no other option except to declare the bandh illegal and unconstitutional. By not doing so, the High Court had failed in its duty for all times to come. By giving the directions, the High Court had tried to over-reach the orders of this court.”

When senior counsel for the State Altaf Ahmad and counsel for the DMK A.K. Ganguly asserted that it was only a strike, the Bench said: “If it is a strike, it has to be against some institution or an organisation. You [DMK] are part of the Central government. Are you against the Centre or against the Supreme Court? The moment it is directed against the general public and not against any particular institution, it would have to be construed as a bandh, which is prohibited by this court.”

When Mr. Ganguly said the purpose of the strike was only to expedite the Sethusamduram project, the Bench said: “How can you expedite the project when this court has said that the dredging work can go on without damaging Ramar Sethu and when the Centre had sought three months time for considering an alternative alignment.”

Mr. Ganguly replied, “What we are saying is don’t take three months; expedite it even if it is through an alternative alignment. For this we are going to hold peaceful meetings.”

The Bench referred to the resolution and asked counsel “what do you mean by cessation of work and closure of shops if it is not a bandh. There can’t be any peaceful cessation of work. The purpose for which you are resorting to a bandh is immaterial. For us it appears to be a bandh. The moment we find that it is a bandh, we can’t permit it.”

The Bench issued notice to the DMK, Congress, CPI (M), CPI and the PMK to respond to the AIADMK petition against the impugned High Court order.

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

Front Page