Case Summary.docx

CASE SUMMARY

1 2 3 4 5

Uttarakhand Ex-Cm Case Hydroelectric Case Panchayat Election Case Witch Craft Case Van Gujjar Case

UTTARAKHAND EX-CM CASE IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Civil Original Jurisdiction Amended Writ Petition No. 90 of 2010(P.I.L.) Under Article 226 of Constitution of India Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra (RLEK)

………………………..Petitioner

Versus State of Uttarakhand and five Others

………………………..Respondent

The petitioner filed this petition through its chairperson alleging that govt. has spent Rs. 92869973(Nine Crore Twenty Eight Lakh Sixty Nine Thousand Nine Hundred and Seventy Three Only) until 2010 in providing various facilities to all ex-chief ministers of state unlawfully without any legislative sanction. State government is spreading crores of rupees in name of personnel management of ex-CM for their whole life on the other hand every citizen of this poor state is reeling under extensive burden of debt. the facilities are provided on the basis of office memo dated 15 February 2002 and order dated 27 November 2001 which never received sanction from Council of Ministers in state and also they were not passed in compliance of Article 166 and 167 of Constitution of India therefore they are not a valid Government orders. When the inquiry goes under Right to Information Act about validity of orders dated 27 November 2001 by the State Estate Department, the petitioner was replied to ask the information from Gopan (secrecy) Department. The department replied that order dated 27 November 2001 either by Council of Ministers or by State legislature denoting that the order were illegally passed in utter disregard to either legislature denoting that the orders was illegally passed in utter disregard to either legislative or executive powers of State as per Part VI of Constitution of India, hence void ab initio. While enjoying the facilities by the virtue of being ex-chief ministers the calculation done by the petitioner included the period when respondent no. 2, 3, 4 were demitted from their respected offices. According to petitioner the facilities received from State Government which was enjoyed by the Respondent No.2 are illegal because all the facilities are received till the end of their term and total expenditure of facilities is 89, 68, 133, So have Respondent No. 3 having expenditure of 41, 24, 481 and Respondent No. 4 having expenditure of 1,14,79,662. On public exchequer these types of facilities becomes burden. This seems to be total wastage of money in front of the natural calamity which was struck last year in UTTRAKHAND. Even after owing a house Respondent No.5 still held the government property for his own personal use. Before demitting His respected office of CM. Respondent No. 6 allotted BIJAPUR guest house for himself for his whole life and also sanctioned crores for renovation and furnishing. Respondent No. 2,3,4 in past 3 years have spent an amount of Rs. 60144420 merely on maintenance and petrol of their

vehicles on Government cost without being legally entitled. Palatial bungalows have also been allotted through an office memo dated 26 Jan 2010 by State Estate officer. It is sanding to see that even after a decade from the formation of UTTARAKHAND the resident of the state have not received the expected benefits. The developmental process has become an ecological burden because only the hills have been impoverished. The 2008-9 Annual Financial Description of Government signifies that Per Capita Income is below National Average Income. Which means state is not benefitting from economic growth of Nation. When untoward incident happens, State Government becomes helpless and argues of having less police force but on other side crores of money spent on security of Ex-CM as if they are prized treasure. At their ancestral houses also securities are provided. When State is under huge financial deficit at that time also the illegal expenses are incurred from public money. The above stated memo and orders were illegal and arbitrary because any financial expenditure in State can only be sanctioned by passing a money bill and appropriation bill in State legislature and all these process were absent in memo and orders. Respondent has recovered all the benefits which were granted deserve. By Hon’ble Court Respondent No. 1 was asked to provided relevant papers with regard to illegal facilities but till date papers has not been provided. Even post of “Ex/Former Chief Minister” does not exist and also not mentioned in constitution therefore luxurious enjoyed on said post stands illegal. The petitioner prays to Hon’ble court to call for records concerning office memo and orders stated above pass an appropriate order or direction in nature certiorari to quash those orders and pass a writ directing Respondent to payback amount in providing them facilities.

HYDROELECTRIC CASE IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (P.I.L.) No. 15 of 2009

............Petitioner

Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra (RLEK)

Versus Union of India (through its Secretary), Ministry of Power, Government of India, Shram Shakti Bhawan, New Delhi and four others. .............Respondents Dated: - 26 February, 2009 th

Coram: Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble D. S. Verma, J. Sri Kartikey Hari Gupta, counsel for the petitioner filed this public interest litigation challenging the suspension of work at the Loharinag-Pala barrage hydroelectric project on Bhagirathi River. The counsel argues that the suspension of the hydroelectric project is unreasonable. Suspending the work would lead to more expenses. Because it seems that, an amount equal to 450 crores has already been spent on the project and by suspending this project only the contractors would get benefits due to price escalation. Further it was mentioned by the council that Ganga River Basin Authority is created by the ministry of environment and forests for looking into the concerned matter. ISSUE; There should be sufficient reason of passing such an order it depends on the govt. that whether the suspension order passed by them is maintainable or not. HELD; The Court held that the impugned order dated 19th February, 2009 issued for suspension of the work shall not be acted upon until further orders of this court. All related matters would be heard by the court after six weeks.

PANCHAYAT ELECTION CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition (G) no. 719 of 1995 Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra (RLEK)

................Petitioner

Versus Government of Uttarakhand & Others. ..............Respondents

This order is in regard to a previously filed writ petition. The petitioner claiming that election for panchayat bodies had not been held in all the States except Bihar. It was because some of the provision of act which passed by State of Bihar regarding panchayat elections were challenged in Patna High Court, also the same is pending before the Supreme Court of India. Hence, the petition stands disposed. Nevertheless it should be noted that 73rd Amendment Act and some clauses of Article 243 provide for tenure of Panchayat and timely conducting of elections. Article 243 E States that election should be conducted before the expiry of tenure or within Six months of dissolution of panchayat. All the clauses specified in Article 243 should be followed and should be withheld only in case of emergencies. The petition stands disposed and no action needs to be taken regarding it.

WITCH CRAFT CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra (RLEK)

..............Petitioner

Versus Union of India and 7 others

..........Respondent

This case was filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution for issuing of writ of mandamus by the petitioner i.e. RLEK(Avdhash Kaushal) asking the court to pass a decree for the protection of women children and other poor section of people who are being exploited in the name of evil practice named WITCH-HUNT. While the petitioner had organized literary programme in Jharkhand, many cases of torture and killing of innocent women came to light. Women, there, are subjected to deprivation, brutality, extortion and mercilessly killed in name of old and evil practice 'Dayan Pratha' or 'Witch hunt'. The women who are branded as witches are mercilessly tortured, humiliated, assaulted, raped, lynched, decapitated, hacked and even killed. Being from amongst marginalized groups and sections of society due to extreme poverty, illiteracy and ignorance cannot approach Supreme Court for justice. At the concluding day of 3 days programme, women participants passed a resolution that RLEK should take up case on their behalf to help them seek Justice and protect their interest and lives which are being butchered due to evil practice of Dayan Pratha. Thus, this case is being petitioned as PIL. In past years, more than 2500 women have been killed in the name of Witchcraft. The women suffers from violence including gang-rape, torture, sometimes drenched with urine and human excreta, drink raw blood of freshly slaughtered animals and ever killed brutally. Witch trials are conducted in tribal areas of Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Assam, Orissa, Bihar and Rajasthan. Despite there being Anti Witchcraft Act in Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Bihar, atrocities are still committed against women with failure of State in fulfilling their obligation. Offences against women in relation to dayanpratha are substantive offences under Indian Penal Code, 1860. These offences include murder under Section 300; abetment to suicide the main concern of the Commission was to protect the families which have not yet moved out. Keeping the object in view, the Government of India was directed to appoint a retired District Judge who

would undertake the task of ascertaining the willingness of families to move out to the new camp and only the families which he identifies as willing families would be moved out with provided all the facilities promised as per rehabilitation scheme . Commission made it clear that Van Gujjars should not be subjected to harassment by forest authorities in enjoyment of their legitimate rights and until law renders them liable to move out, their rights should not be violated . They, further, ordered authorities not to deny grazing rights in respect of existing 11,000 cattle and provide additional grazing facilities outside Rajaji National Park to meet the demands. With reference to right to lop the forest trees, authorities were directed to make a bona fide exercise to determine lopping areas taking into consideration growth and age of trees, and make them available for lopping purposes. er under section 306, attempt to murder under section 307, voluntary causing of hurt and grievous hurt under section 321 and 322 respectively , wrongful restraint under section 339, wrongful confinement under section 340 , criminal force under section 350 , assault under section 354 , rape under section 375 , cruelty by husband under section 498 A and criminal intimidation under section 503. It also violates Article 6 and 7 of ICCPR, article 3 of UDHR and article 2(1) and 14 of torture convention. The petitioner seeks the court for issuing the concerned writ in order to protect the rights of poor women. Separate funds and scheme to be immediately created by Ministry of Women and Child Development to support victim of Dayan Pratha in financially way and help them to secure safe rehabilitation or provide any other equiseta help for protection of life and dignity of exploited women.

VAN GUJJAR CASE NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMISSION SARDAR PATEL BHAVAN NEW DELHI Case no. 14971/24/97-98 DATE: 4th March 1999 CORAM: JUSTICE V.S. MALIMATH, MEMBER PROCEEDINGS

This complaint has been filed by Sri Avdhash Kaushal alleging that van Gujjars living in forest under Rajaji National Park are harassed and tortured by Director and member of the park and are prevented from ferrying fodder for their animals, selling milk and bribe is demanded for permitting transport of food, milk and fodder. They were forcefully lead to leave the park in exchange of two acres of land each. After receiving the petition on the above matter, commission issued a notice to chief secretary of Uttar Pradesh. In response to which chief conservator of forests submitted a report enclosing copy of rehabilitation policy and denied the allegations put on them. The report also stated that Van Gujjars living there are disturbing the eco-system by indiscriminate felling of tress. Earlier in 1989, a petition was filed in Supreme Court against of Uttar Pradesh to which court had directed for settlement of Van Gujjars outside Rajaji National Park. The orders of court were put into action and till date 62 families have been resettled in the pathri region of Haridwar. These people were provided with 10,000 Rs for transporting, a school and 2 acres of land each. Even after hearing the response complainant did not give up his stand and called the response as factually in supportable. After the consideration of complainant the commission referred the matter to Shri Chamanlal, Special Reporter who was asked to get in touch with affected parties who were involved in this case and also talked with the members of Gujjars families who told him that 62 families have received two acres of land and are living happily there. The main concern of the Commission was to protect the families which have not yet moved out. Keeping the object in view, the Government of India was directed to appoint a retired District Judge who would undertake the task of ascertaining the willingness of families to move out to the new camp and only the families which he identifies as willing families would be moved out with provided all the facilities promised as per rehabilitation scheme. Commission made it clear that Van Gujjars should not be subjected to harassment by forest authorities in enjoyment of their legitimate rights and until law renders them liable to move out, their rights should not be violated. They, further, ordered authorities not to deny grazing rights in respect of existing

11,000 cattle and provide additional grazing facilities outside Rajaji National Park to meet the demands. With reference to right to lop the forest trees, authorities were directed to make a bona fide exercise to determine lopping areas taking into consideration growth and age of trees, and make them available for lopping purposes. All these factors were pointed out and highlighted by the voluntary organization in the national workshop on ‘Declining access to and control over natural resources in National Park and Sanctuaries’ organized by the society of Participatory Research in Asia (PRIA), Delhi, in collaboration with Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra (RLEK), Dehradun. The commission has given these orders under the hope that it will safeguard legitimate rights of Van Gujjar families and concern of authorities till decision is taken in accordance with the wildlife protection Act, 1972.