Order reserved in Mamta case
From Our Correspondent
CHANDIGARH, Jan 5 — Mr Justice V M Jain of the Punjab and Haryana High Court today reserved his order on a petition filed by the Kurukshetra girl, Mamta, against Punjab’s Additional Director-General of Police B.P. Tiwari alleging molestation and demanding a CBI probe into her
complaint.
Mr Justice Jain reserved his order after marathon arguments from both sides. The Punjab Advocate-General, Mr H S Mattewal, submitted before that the state government was ready “ to get the matter inquired into by a senior woman IAS officer” if the High Court so desired, but opposed a CBI probe at the first instance pleading that the petitioner had not adopted the procedure prescribed in the Criminal Procedure
Code.
The Punjab Government also submitted a one-page interim inquiry report conducted into the maid’s complaint under the signatures of Additional Director-General of Police ( Crime), Mr S.V. Singh, stating that the petitioner and her mother, Mrs Bimla Sharma had refused to appear before the undersigned on two occasions after the summons were served on them on December 19 and 22 on the plea that their case was fixed for hearing in the High Court”.
The presence of Mr J.S. Sandhu and his wife could not be obtained in spite of efforts made in this regard at Kurukshetra, Nawanshahr and Jalandhar. However, it has been reported by the Jalandhar SSP that Mrs Sandhu had noted the summons for appearance on January 5, said the interim report. Mr Sandhu had described himself to be uncle of Mamta when he produced her before newsmen last
month.
The advocate appearing on behalf of Mr Tiwari during his arguments stated that the petitioner had not adopted the Cr P C procedure and had come directly to the High Court which according to a Supreme Court judgement was an “attempt to ignore the statutory provision of the law laid down under the Cr.P.C.
”RTA secy fined A Division Bench of the High Court comprising Mr Justice Jawahar Lal Gupta and Mr Justice N.K. Sood today imposed a fine of Rs 25,000 on Jalandhar Regional Transport Authority ( RTA) Secretary Harmel Singh for illegally impounding a tourist bus of International Tourism, a Chandigarh-based transport company on October 17 last year.The petitioner
company had filed a writ petition challenging the impounding of its bus by the RTA on that day when the bus was carrying four tourists of one family from West Bengal in its AC bus from Chandigarh to Amritsar. The RTA impounded the bus on the ground that the driver was not carrying his licence and the bus was being operated in violation of its tourist
permit.
Counsel for the petitioner company, Mr R.K. Handa alleged that the RTA was hand in glove with Batala MLA Jagdish Sahni who owned two to three tourist buses that ply on the route and the petitioner company had complained against his illegal methods of plying the buses. The STC had marked that complaint’s enquiry to the
RTA.
Mr Harmel Singh, who was present in court with the case record, gave an undertaking before the Bench of depositing the fine within a
month.
The Bench also allowed the petitioner company to file a claim for damages for the illegal detention of its bus from October 17 till date in a civil court. DPI’s assurance on seniority
lists Our Legal Correspondent adds: The Punjab Education Department submitted an affidavit before the High Court in a contempt petition filed by Mr Hardarshan Singh and others stating that the final seniority lists of headmasters, headmistresses and lecturers had been finalised and circulated by implementing the apex court judgement rendered in the Ajit Singh Jangua case. It was further stated by Mr Ram Kishan, Asstt Director in the office of DPI (S), that on the basis of these seniority lists promotions would be made within three
months.
The petitioners, belonging to general category, had sought directions for considering and promoting them to the post of principal on November 27. Mr Justice J.S. Khehar had directed the Education Department to circulate the final seniority lists by implementing the decision in Ajit Jangua case on or before December 28, and had posted the case for January 4, on which date the respondents had informed the court about the finalisation of seniority lists. But as there were no submissions with regard to giving effect to those seniority lists, the matter was adjourned till
today.
It was contended by counsel for the petitioners that the compiling of seniority lists would be of no use until and unless a decision was issued to implement the same and promote eligible persons to the post of principal.
|
