Saturday,
December 21, 2002, Chandigarh, India
|
SC quashes PM’s order
New Delhi, December 20 “It seems that the decision was a result of panic reaction of the Government. No facts and figures were gone into. Without application of mind to any of the relevant consideration, a decision was taken to cancel all allotments,” a Bench comprising Mr Justice Y.K. Sabharwal and Mr Justice H.K. Sema said. However, it constituted a two-member committee comprising retired apex court Judge S.C. Aggarwal and retired Delhi High Court Judge P.K. Bahri to examine 417 cases of alleged political favouritism highlighted by The Indian Express. Saying that the Government should have ordered an independent probe instead of cancelling the allotments in the wake of the controversy, the Bench observed that “the mere reason that a controversy has been raised by itself cannot clothe the government with the power to pass such a drastic order which has devastating effect on a large number of people.” “In governance, controversies are bound to arise. In a given situation, depending on the facts and figures, it may be legally permissible to resort to such en masse cancellation where executive finds that prima facie a large number of such selections were tainted and segregation of good and bad would be difficult and time consuming affair,” it said. Indicating that in the present case only 5 to 10 per cent of the allotments were in the centre of controversy, the apex court said “in such a situation, en masse cancellation would be unjustified and arbitrary”. The solution was worse than the problem, it said adding that “cure was worse than the disease. Equal treatment to unequals is nothing but inequality.” Justifying the setting up of the committee to scrutinise the records pertaining to allotments where allegations of political favouritism were made,
the Lamenting that none in the government examined the impact that was likely to result due to en masse cancellation, the Bench said: “Many had resigned their jobs.... There were many Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, war widows, and those whose near relation had died as a result of terrorist activities. The effect of none was considered.” “How could all those large number against whom there was not even insinuation could be clubbed with the handful of those who were said to have been allotted these dealerships or distributorships on account of political connection and patronage,” the Bench asked. Rejecting the government’s stand that the decision was taken keeping in mind probity in governance, the Bench said: “The rotten apples cannot be equated with good apples. To put both categories - tainted and the rest - at par is wholly unjustified, arbitrary, unconstitutional being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.” Meanwhile, Union Petroleum Minister Ram Naik today said the Government would implement the verdict of the Supreme Court after looking into the details of the order. “On the basis of information from media, the government will assist the two-member committee, which has been asked by the apex court to scrutinise the 413 cases,” Mr Naik said. The minister expressed the hope that the inquiry committee would complete its work with in the stipulated period. All cases, which have been referred to the committee, were reported in the media. Soon after the Supreme Court verdict, Mr Naik reportedly spoke to Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pramod Mahajan informing them about the setting aside of the government order. The Supreme Court verdict will benefit 3,443 dealers of petrol stations, LPG and kerosene agencies. Petroleum ministry officials said following the apex court order, all 2,248 dealerships would be formally returned to the
owners. Presently, all these dealerships were run by the operators subject to certain conditions. It is expected that around Rs 500 crore will be invested in setting up new dealerships for which letters of intent were already issued by the oil companies. Asked if the decision to cancel all allotments of petrol stations and gas agencies made since January 2000 was taken in haste, Mr Naik said: “The decision was taken after due consideration of all aspects, but the Supreme Court has not accepted (our opinion).” Meanwhile, the Congress today said the Supreme Court judgement on the “blanket” cancellation of petrol stations and LPG dealerships by the government had vindicated the party’s stand on the issue and demanded all cases of political favouritism should be probed. “With all humility, we have been proved perfectly right”, party spokesman S. Jaipal Reddy told reporters here. Besides, he said the party was of the view that this kind of cancellation would benefit only irregular allottees. Mr Reddy demanded a probe into all allotments made on political considerations.
PTI, UNI |
| Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir | Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs | Nation | Editorial | | Business | Sport | World | Mailbag | In Spotlight | Chandigarh Tribune | Ludhiana Tribune 50 years of Independence | Tercentenary Celebrations | | 122 Years of Trust | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |