Prabhjit Singh, Hindustan Times Chandigarh,
November 28, 2013
Copyright © 2013 HT Media Limited
Notwithstanding
its own affidavit in the court of law for re-opening the cases of fraudulent
occupation of village common lands identified by the Justice Kuldip Singh
tribunal in Punjab, the state has so far paid around Rs. 1 crore to legal
experts in the Supreme Court seeking annulment of the tribunal.
In April
2013, the state had already paid over Rs. 50 lakh to the apex court lawyers
when it submitted the affidavit in the Punjab and Haryana high court.
The deal
stuck with the apex court lawyers, as notified on August 14, 2012, was to pay
Rs. 5.5 lakh per appearance plus Rs. 1 lakh for each conference to senior
advocate AK Ganguli and retainership fee of Rs. 1 lakh (including drafting of
pleadings, besides instructing and briefing Ganguly, plus Rs. 50,000 per
appearance separately to advocates Nikhil Nayyar and Ranjana Roy.
So far,
10 hearings have taken place in the apex court where the state filed the
special leave petition (SLP) in August 2012, challenging the high court's
jurisdiction to form such a tribunal.
With the
last hearing taking place on November 18, 2013, the case is still in the stage
of serving of notices to respondents. They mainly included the Mubarakpur
village panchayat and the individual cultivators of the village 'shamlat' land.
Tribunal in limbo
In
mid-July 2013, the SAD-BJP government was pleased when the tribunal's tenure
lapsed in the absence of an extension, since then, to be given by the Punjab
and Haryana high court.
Punjab's
additional advocate general, Reeta Kohli, rightly acknowledges, "If the
high court or the state did not extend the tenure (of the tribunal), then the
tribunal also never asked for any further extension after its term was
over."
Tribunal
head Justice Kuldip Singh had expressed his inability to continue on
"health grounds" in July, while its two other members BN Gupta and PN
Aggarwal have so far not received any communique either from the high court or
from the Punjab government whether to continue or not.
The
tribunal office in Sector 17 here is intact with infrastructure, in the absence
of any manpower, which the state government pleasantly withdrew in July itself.
Both
Gupta and Aggarwal have not posed their queries for continuing in the tribunal.
"It
(the situation) is a stalemate, and the matter is in the court, as you
know" Gupta told HT, confirming that the tribunal members had not received
any communication either from the state or the high court.
"We
told the drivers of the official vehicles that they were not needed till
further orders," he said.
What the SLP says in SC
* The
impugned judgment of the high court (of forming the tribunal) is erroneous and
liable to be set aside
*
Neither the Constitution nor any statute empowers the high court to create or
constitute quasi-judicial tribunals for adjudicating disputes
* High
court erred in enlarging the scope of the writ petition, which was confined to
a challenge to certain orders passed by the state authorities
Vs
What the state's affidavit
commits in HC
* The
cases involving fraud etc as identified by the tribunal will be re-opened
* Action
will be taken against officials of the revenue and consolidation departments
found involved
* The
policy to exercise the dispossession, and recovery of profits from those who
are shown in possession in terms of the latest 'jamabandi' entries (mutations),
as suggested in the tribunal report, is being examined to be submitted in the
high court in due course.
No comments:
Post a Comment