| NAGPUR: The Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court on Wednesday struck a blow to government attempt to escape legal scrutiny of irrigation scam by rejecting Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (VIDC) plea that two PILs in the matter were not maintainable. A bench of justices Bhushan Dharmadhikari and Arun Chaudhari ruled that technical lapses in public interest matters could not lead to outright rejection of petition. The petitioners - Jan Manch and social workers including Mohan Karemore, Amit Khot and Bharti Dabhadkar - had alleged massive corruption and mismanagement in all irrigation projects in Vidarbha including Gosikhurd while demanding a judicial or CBI probe into the matter. VIDC, through senior counsel V R Manohar, raised two contentions as preliminary objections to maintainability of PILs. He also questioned the very basis of petitioners' demand for a CBI enquiry arguing it was not as per mandamus. It stressed that the petitioners should have made a representation to the government and only on its rejection could they have moved the court. He had also contended that the petitioners should have lodged a formal police or a private complaint before demanding a CBI enquiry. VIDC's prayers were opposed by the petitioners' counsels Anil Kilor and Srikant Khandalkar who argued that procedural safeguards could not be allowed to defeat substantive public rights and PIL offerred an opportunity to make amends. They stated that mere ordering of enquiry may not always influence the investigating agencies. "In appropri ate cases, even in the face of such prayers, the court may mould relief and pass suitable orders," they stated. Citing various Supreme and high court verdicts, the judges observed there was a need to adopt a non-traditional approach in matters where fundamental rights or issues fundamental to success of democracy were at stake. "When PILs themselves are not adversarial, the insistence by public-oriented bodies like respondents for its dismissal at threshold and not permitting the court to even to look into alleged wrongdoings is not easy to understand," they tersely observed. They added that instead of technicalities, the respondents could have welcomed the notice of the court, treated it as sufficient demand and made proper statements on merits to drive away petitioners' apprehensions. "Respondents insistence upon technicalities is unsustainable. They have not cared to point out prejudice caused to it due to their absence," the justices stated in their 42-page o rder. Flaying the chief secretary for not following governor's orders, the judges stated that latter had instructed him to review compliances of his current and earlier directives to address policy issues. "Documents show directions issued by the governor on May 27, 2005, and March 13, 2012, have not been fulfilled or looked properly. Material prima facie shows indifference or omission by the state even to comply with the directives issued by the governor. We are not concluding this controversy on merits at this stage as respondents have not addressed us on this aspect," they observed adding that the chief secretary failed to submit report about discrepancies in the figures of unspent balance of Rest of Maharashtra (RoM) development boards. They said this discussion was sufficient to reveal futility in exercise attempted to be forced upon the petitioners by the respondents. "There is no defence of mala fide or any oblique motive on petitioners' part. In fact, the government's statements and governor's communications show some substance in their grievance. We failed to understand why the respondents are taking it as adversarial PILs," they said. The court held a 'rule of procedure' like making of 'demand' could not outweigh public interest and could not warrant dismissal of PILs. "Merely because a CBI enquiry is suggested as one of the options, PILs can't be dismissed. We, therefore, find no merit in objections pressed as preliminary ones and the same are thus rejected," the court ruled. The respondents were asked to file their respective replies on merits of controversy in both PILs within four weeks.  via Top Stories - Google News http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&fd=R&usg=AFQjCNGFHGSp_NJj01CyXbtKNDX__hcXKg&url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/nagpur/HC-will-hear-irrigation-scam-PILs/articleshow/19718293.cms | |||
| | |||
| | |||
|
No comments:
Post a Comment