M A I N   N E W S

Quota Tangle
Govt asks CJI for early hearing
S.S. Negi
Legal Correspondent

Originally, a Bench of Justices Arijit Pasayat and Lokeshwar Singh Panta after passing the interim stay order on March 29, had fixed the hearing of the main case for August. The same Bench had yesterday rejected government’s application for vacating the stay on the ground that it had failed to bring any new facts on record.

Government law officers in full force, led by Attorney General Milon Banerjee, told the CJI’s Bench that there were compelling reason for early disposal of the case.

Banerjee pointed out that a request had been made before the Bench, headed by Justice Pasayat for referring the case to a constitution Bench yesterday and the government had been assured that it would be considered during the next hearing.

But the brief hearing today turned into a heated argument when a battery of lawyers representing the anti-reservation students’ objected to the manner in which the Centre had tried to come up before the CJI instead of going to the same Bench, which is seized of the case. They termed it as a “procedural impropriety” and violation of Supreme Court’s rules on procedure.

But the CJI snubbed them by saying that “It is my privilege to decide which matter has to be heard when.”

Senior advocate L.M Lahoti, appearing for medicos, asked why should a special preference be given to the government to mention the case in this manner.

“This has become an issue of prestige for the government which is evident from the appearance of the top law officers, including Attorney General today, a day after the court had rejected their plea for vacating the stay,” he said.

Former Additional Solicitor General Mukul Rohtagi, another lawyer for anti-reservationists, though also objected to the manner the government had chosen to raise the issue, yet he said he was not opposed to preponing the case but the intention of the Centre raised several doubts.

The government knew on March 29 itself that the case had been put off for August but instead of seeking its early disposal it preferred a petition for review of the stay order and when it was rejected they strangely came up with an application for urgent hearing, he said.

The Attorney General said “overwhelming public interest was in favour of thousands of OBC students, who are aspiring to get admission to the CEIs… we want that they get benefited from this legislation so that their academic year is not lost.”.

Sushil Jain, another lawyer for anti-reservation students, said “they are feeling like second grade citizens in their own country as not even a single MP had stood up for them in Parliament during the passage of the Act, which is more driven by vote bank politics. Their only hope is the Supreme Court.”