COMMON CAUSE UPDATES

Developments in earlier interventions:

Supreme Court

  1. WP(C) 330/2001: Slaughter House Pollution 

    This petition was taken up for hearing on November 27, 2015. At this hearing, instead of Ministry of Urban Development, the Ministry of Environment and Forests was substituted as the nodal Ministry. The matter is likely to be listed on February 26, 2016.

  2. WP(C) 13/2003: Large Scale Advertisements

    The matter was taken up for hearing on October 27, 2015. In view of the review filed by the Union of India on October 26, 2015, the Court decided to hear the petitions filed by the centre and the states collectively. Though this was opposed by our counsels, the Court posted it for hearing on January 12, 2016. However, the matter did not appear in the cause-list. There are no further orders of hearing.

  3. WP(C) 215/2005: Living Will

    The matter was listed before a constitution bench on January 15, 2016, when the government has reported to have assured the Court of the possibility of a law on passive euthanasia. It has also been reported that the government is studying the verdict of the Court in Shanbaug case and the Law Commission’s 241st report that favoured allowing passive euthanasia with certain safeguards. The matter was listed to be heard on February 1, 2016 but was not taken up. It is likely to be heard again in February 2016.

  4. WP(C) 463/2012: Illegal allocation of captive coal blocks

    A high level committee headed by former CBI Director Mr. M.L. Sharma has been constituted by the Court for the purpose of ascertaining whether the investigations conducted by CBI have been influenced in any manner by Mr. Ranjit Sinha in respect of the accused in the case. The Court also granted permission to Mr. Sharma to access the original Visitor’s Register maintained at the residence of Mr. Sinha and the list of the names of 23 personnel and four CBI constables working at his residential establishment (so far kept in a sealed cover).

     On December 14, 2015, expressing its unhappiness at the persistent delays in the investigations by the CBI, the Court allowed its request for substitution of a senior police official and noted that the investigation be concluded at the earliest without seeking further extensions or transfer of officials.

    The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) had on September 17, 2015 filed the 8th Status Report for on investigations under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2012 and the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, in respect of 43 companies. Refraining from commenting on the progress made by the ED, the Court directed both the ED and the CBI to file their reports up to December 31, 2015, by January 5, 2016.The Court also stated that the CVC reports had been taken on record and would be dealt with on the next hearing. The matter was listed for January 11, 2016 but no order has been uploaded on the SC website as yet. Noting that the Enquiry Committee constituted by the Court had started working from September 15, 2015, it also directed the UOI to grant remuneration to the committee’s members and staff.

    Previously this matter was taken up on December 7, 2015 when the Court had granted time to Mr. Sharma and listed the matter for December 14. The matter had similarly come up in October/ November 2015 but was deferred for later dates. There are no further orders of listing.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      [ 54 ]   


5 . WP(C) 114/2014: Illegal Mining in the State of Odisha

The matter were taken up at three instances in January and the Court directed the amicus curiae, Mr. A D N Rao to file his response on the issues raised in the IAs filed in pursuance of the May 2014 order of the Supreme Court in this matter. It is likely to be listed on February 19, 2016.

6.  Cont.Pet. (C) 550/2015 in W.P.(C) 821/1990: Contempt Petition against lawyers strike

Common Cause has filed a contempt petition against the strike of lawyers in Delhi High Court and all district courts of Delhi on the issue of conflict over pecuniary jurisdiction. In WP (C) 821/1990 (Harish Uppal vs Union of India) the Supreme Court had observed that lawyers had no right to go on strike and could not give any call for boycott. The court also held that lawyers refusing to respond to such a call could not be visited with any adverse consequences by the Bar Association or the Bar Council. In May this year, the Delhi High Court Bar Association went on a strike against passage of a bill by Rajya Sabha increasing the pecuniary jurisdiction of district courts. The bill was expected to reduce the workload of the Delhi high court by transferring thousands of civil suits, valued upto Rs two crores, to the six district courts.

The contempt petition seeks issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to incorporate appropriate rule prohibiting the use of strike by advocates in the Standards for Professional Conduct and Etiquette” framed under Section 49(1)(c) of the Advocates Act, 1961. The Court had issued notice in the matter on September 11, 2015.

In the hearing on November 27, 2015, Mr. Ram Jethmalani requested for time to convene a meeting of the important sections of the Bar to try sorting out the problems once and for all. The Court granted his request and also directed the respondents to file their response in the meanwhile. The matter is now listed for April 5, 2016.

Delhi High Court

  1. WP (C) 7240/2013: Evidence of corruption by Shri Virbhadra Singh  

    The High Court on Dec 10, 2015 disposed of the petition filed by Common Cause against Mr. Singh, ruling that issue was already under investigation by CBI and income tax. During the course of hearing, the Court was informed by the counsels that with respect to the tax matters, the proceedings had been taken up for assessment and re-assessment. The counsel for CBI stated that a regular case had been registered and the investigation would be taken to its logical conclusion in accordance with law. In light of this, the petition was disposed with the observation that it was no longer necessary to go into the issue of maintainability of the writ petition.

  2. W.P.(C) 8363/2010: Misuse of BSP reserved symbol The petition challenging the order of the Central Election Commission rejecting our request for freezing the reserved symbol of BSP on account of its misuse by its government in Uttar Pradesh was taken up on December 10, 2015. The Court had directed the parties in October 2014 to file their written submissions, to which CC had complied. Entire 2015 was spent on account of adjournments by the respondent counsel, lawyers strike and non-availability of the bench. This matter has now been renotified for February 25, 2016.

  3. W.P. (C) 866/2010: Post-Retirement Activities of Former Supreme Court Judges

    Common Cause had filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court on February 10, 2010, highlighting how Article 124(7) of the Constitution of India is being violated in both letter and spirit because of certain post-retirement activities of the former judges of the Supreme Court of India. This provision forbids a person who has held office as a Judge of the Supreme Court from pleading or acting in any court or before any authority.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            [ 55 ]


 

 During the pendency of this petition the Society secured some significant outcomes. The High Court had instructed its registry to refuse to accept writ petitions in which opinions of retired judges are annexed. This was in line with our prayer for the prohibition of this practice, which is contrary to the spirit of Article 124 (7) of the Constitution.  

As regards our prayer for debarring chairpersons and members of various tribunals from taking up arbitration work during their term of office, the Court was informed that a Bill to prohibit members of a tribunal or a statutory body from acting as arbitrator had been introduced in the Rajya Sabha and referred for consideration by the Standing Committee. In context of this prayer, it was observed by the Court that as retired Judges appointed as Chairpersons or Members of Statutory Bodies, Tribunals and Commissions discharge judicial/quasi- judicial functions and their involvement in any other commercial legal activity or as arbitrators would necessarily require them to interact, in all possibility, with the same set of people/professionals who appear before them in their capacity as Chairperson/ Member of the Statutory Body/Tribunal of which they are whole time office holder, giving rise to speculation about their impartiality. Thus, not only would pursuing such a vocation / occupation simultaneously with the office occupied, be at the cost of the work of the said office but may also jeopardise/appear to jeopardise the reputation of the said office. From the contention put forth by the respondents, it was obvious to the Court that the relief sought in the petition had not been refuted by the UOI. In fact the UOI had itself tried to grant the said relief but there were implicit delays in the same.

 It was observed that the Courts have always stepped in whenever they have found a vacuum in legislation; however, they would hesitate to do so in this case respecting the doctrine of separation of powers and out of our deference to the legislature, which is seized of the matter.

The petition was disposed on December 11, 2015 with a direction to the UOI to give special attention to the issue and to ensure that appropriate legislation was made at the earliest.

It was observed that the Courts have always stepped in whenever they have found a vacuum in legislation; however, they would hesitate to do so in this case respecting the doctrine of separation of powers and out of our deference to the legislature, which is seized of the matter.

The petition was disposed on December 11, 2015 with a direction to the UOI to give special attention to the issue and to ensure that appropriate legislation was made at the earliest.

Allahabad High Court

  1. WP (C) 48416/2015: Extension of audit jurisdiction of the C & AG of India to NOIDA, G.Noida Authority and Yamuna Expressway Authority

    Subsequent to the detailed additional rejoinder filed by Common Cause, on December 4, 2015 the Court directed that the matter be put up as fresh on 11 December 2015. During the course of the hearing on December 11, 2015, certain factual aspects emerged before the Court, which had not been made in the existing affidavits filed earlier by the respondents. The Court was assured by the AG that a comprehensive affidavit of disclosure would be filed indicating the nature of the financial relationship between the State Government on one hand and Noida, Greater Noida and Yamuna Expressway Authorities respectively. On the request of the AG for time in order to enable him to make a full and candid disclosure, the Court allowed the matter to stand over to January 27, 2016.

    In the hearing of January 27, 2016, the Advocate General sought an extension of time to file the counter affidavit as directed in the previous order. The Court, noting that sufficient time was granted in the previous order, granted the last and final opportunity to the Respondents to file the counter by the next date of hearing on February 11, 2016.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Cover Photo credit : Himanshu Joshi


Printed & published by Vipul Mudgal on behalf of Common Cause, 5 Institutional Area, Nelson Mandela Road, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110070, Printed at Gaylord Printers, F-128/2 Mohammadpur, RK Puram, New Delhi 110066, Editor-Vipul Mudgal, Tel No. 26131313, 45152796, email: commoncauseindia@gmail.com, website: www.commoncause.in

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             [ 56 ]

October-December, 2015