Kerala HC questions government’s double standards in implementing SC judgments.
Kerala High Court today questioned the double standards adopted by the left government in implementing numerous judgments of the Supreme Court.
A division bench comprising of Justices PR Ramachandra Menon and Devan Ramachandran asked why the govt that implements Supreme Court’s judgments by deploying police personnel in massive numbers and by issuing prohibitive orders is making an attempt an peaceful settlement between the two belligerent factions of Syrian orthodox church within the case of St Mary’s Orthodox Syrian Church at Piravom.
In an interim order, the court said, “We should say that we are utterly bowled over by the submissions did on behalf of the State as additionally the pleadings on record on behalf of the govt and also the police, since we don’t perceive under what sanction of law does the Police authorities or the State Govt say that they’re attempting for a peaceful settlement outside court, although Exhibits P1 and P2 judgments of the Honorable Supreme Court concededly hold the sector.
We fail to grasp however any of those authorities can try a ‘settlement’ once the views of the Honorable Supreme Court are fully doubtless and in what manner they might currently obtain latitude therefore on enable them to implement these judgments only with the consent of the belligerent factions.
Commenting on the double standards in implementing Supreme Court judgments, the court said within the order, “We propose to mention nothing further at this point of time, although we’ve been persuaded to a clear view concerning the bonafides concerned because we have a tendency to see that in bound different instances, the State has enforced judgments powerfully by deploying large amounts of police and by imposing restrictions under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
We, therefore, fail to grasp however during a case of a far lesser magnitude, confessedly where at the best 200-400 people are concerned, the State ought to shy away from their obligation to implement orders of courts or why the police should unable to help say that they’re incapable of executing directions and declarations of law by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, although they concede without any reservation that Exhibits P1 and P2 judgments are binding on them implicitly.”
The court then granted another chance to the state government to tell whether or not it wants to stick to the submissions made before the court or act as per the mandate of law to implement the Supreme Court’s judgments.
Though the counsels for one among the parties submitted that the Supreme Court had allowed the parties to enter into settlement, the court said even if it’s true, the state government “can at its leisure keep holding meetings one after the other ostensibly to settle the problems and drag the matter without implementation of the judgments of the Honorable Supreme Court with no sign of ending.”
In a statement filed in july this year, government had informed the court that makes an attempt at settlements were made at completely different levels, including by the chief minister by involving the heads of the two factions, however they weren’t productive.
After the court asked the govt to inform its stance by the subsequent posting of the case, advocate general submitted that the govt will implement the Supreme Court’s judgments using necessary police force if the HC directs. Otherwise, the govt ought to be given longer to get a peaceful settlement between the parties, the advocate general told the court. The court has currently posted the case for further hearing on December eleventh.
Photo credits: Suprabhaatham