More sinister than the worst terrorist attack
Read these two news . The implication is more sinister than any terrorist attack or war against the nation. The first news shows that the individuals are more powerful than the the Supreme Court of India. in other words, when the Court deals with powerful regional kshtraps, it is merely a teethless paper tiger.
The second news also shows that a group of politicians are above the Constitution of the Country.
You can’t dictate terms to us, SC warns DMK
5 Aug 2008, TNN
NEW DELHI: Incensed by the repeated failure of Tamil Nadu chief minister M Karunanidhi and Union transport minister T R Baalu to respond to a contempt petition accusing them of participating in a bandh last year in breach of its order, the Supreme Court on Monday issued a veiled threat — ¶Do they need a bailable arrest warrant to appear personally and answer the charges.¶
The court had been acceding to the requests of Karunanidhi, Baalu, TN transport minister K N Nehru, chief secretary L K Tripathy, DGP P Rajendran and transport secretary Debendranath Sarangi since it issued notice to them on October 29 last year on a contempt petition filed by AIADMK.
AIADMK had accused them of flouting SC’s September 30, 2007, order asking the state to maintain law and order as well as transport services on October 1, 2007, the day the DMK-led coalition had called a bandh in protest against the stalling of the Sethusamudram channel project.
Interestingly, during the hearing on the contempt petition, the SC had observed that constitutional machinery appeared to have broken down in TN warranting recommendation of President’s rule in the state, a remark that had created a furore.
On Monday, a bench comprising Justices B N Agrawal and G S Singhvi was informed by TN counsel V G Pragasam that only the chief secretary and the DGP had filed their responses to the showcause notices. “What about the chief minister,¶ the bench asked and on learning that even the union transport minister had not filed his response to SC’s showcause notice, said, ¶They do not have the time to file reply. Just because you are a central minister does not mean you are above law and you would not care about the Supreme Court order. You think you can dictate terms to the Supreme Court. If this is their attitude, we will issue bailable arrest warrant against them and let them come and appear before the court.¶
The bench, which on March 31 had given four weeks for filing of responses, was anguished that none of the contemnors had the courtesy of honouring a Supreme Court deadline. Both the chief secretary and the DGP contended that they had not committed any contempt of court as all possible steps were taken on October 1, 2007, to maintain normalcy in the state in compliance of the apex court order. The CM, Pragasam said, has decided not to file a formal response and will adopt the stand taken by the chief secretary and the DGP. The bench said when CM was given four weeks time on March 31 to file his response, he did not give any indication about adopting the stand taken by his top officials.
The bench asked all respondents to file their responses within four weeks and also explain why they breached the deadline set for filing their replies to the contempt notices.
On a petition filed by AIADMK, the SC on September 30, 2007, had restrained all political parties from going ahead with the October 1 bandh, which was called by the DMK-led coalition to seek speeding up of the Sethusamudram project. The bench, while restraining DMK, CPM, CPI, Congress and PMK from going ahead with the bandh, had warned that as long as the 1998 judgment which termed bandh and hartal to be illegal was in operation, no political party could call for bandh as it inconvenienced people.
When AIADMK counsel Guru Krishna Kumar brought it to the notice of the apex court the very next day, on October 1, 2007, about the alleged violation of the court order, the Bench headed by Justice Agrawal had observed that the bandh organised in breach of orders would make it infer that constitutional machinery in the state had broken down warranting imposition of President’s rule. Pragasam had refuted the AIADMK charges and said only fast was undertaken by the leaders and that vehicles were plying normally.
YSR government reaches out to Backward Classes :Resolves to provide 33% quota in Assembly and Council
HYDERABAD: The Andhra Pradesh government resolved to reach out to the Backward Classes ahead of the general elections next year by resolving to provide 33 per cent reservation in the Legislative Assembly and Council.
A meeting of the State Cabinet here on Monday decided that a resolution would be introduced by the Government in the Legislature during the upcoming monsoon session urging upon the Union Government to bring about a legislation providing for one-third reservation for BCs.
The Government’s justification for this move is that the BCs who constitute over 50 per cent of the State’s population, must be provided their due share in the law-making bodies. The proposal for introducing the quota, which was mooted by Chief Minister Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy, was unanimously approved by the Council of Ministers.
Briefing reporters later, Information Minister A. Ramanarayan Reddy denied that this was a political move aimed at neutralising the possible impact of film actor Chiranjeevi’s new party that is already wooing the BCs and to dispel the feeling that the Congress was anti-BC.
Mr. Ramnarayan Reddy maintained in response to another question that the 33 per cent reservation proposed for women at the Central level would not be in conflict with the quota being planned. The women’s quota could be adjusted within the seats meant for BCs depending on the population of women.
The Cabinet resolved to include six more Backward Castes in the State BCs list to allow reservation benefit to them in education and employment. They were Are Vallu, Bondali, Are Marathi (Surabhi Natakalavallu), Neeli, Rajannala and Baria.
It also decided to refer to the National Scheduled Tribes Commission, the plea made by Rajakas, Vadderas and Valmikis for inclusion in ST list.
http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/05/stories/2008080554240600.htm
