Above: The Sardar Sarovar Project/Photo: en.wikipedia.org

The Congress government in Madhya Pradesh has dug its heels in over the Sardar Sarovar project and is refusing Gujarat’s plea to release more water to test the strength of the dam unless displaced people are rehabilitated

By Rakesh Dixit in Bhopal

For 15 years, Madhya Pradesh behaved like Gujarat’s obedient younger brother over sharing the Narmada water from the Sardar Sarovar Dam. With Narendra Modi as the Gujarat chief minister and then prime minister, former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan could not summon enough courage to look into the plight of thousands of villagers who had been displaced due to additional water being released by it under pressure from Gujarat.

But now with a Congress government in power in Madhya Pradesh, political dynamics over water-sharing have changed. The Kamal Nath government has not only denied more water from the Narmada river to Gujarat as was set down by the Narmada Water Distribution Tribunal, but even sought monetary compensation for the loss suffered due to suspension of hydel power generation from the dam.

Peeved over “defiance” shown by the Madhya Pradesh government, Gujarat has accused Nath of playing politics over water.

Madhya Pradesh has sought the Union water resources ministry’s intervention to resolve the dispute arising from Gujarat’s pressure on it to release 4,000 million cubic metres (MCM) water for testing the gates of the dam. Madhya Pradesh has taken the stand that it has already released 1,600 MCM and cannot release more water. The Congress government has also complained to the Narmada Control Authority (NCA) in Delhi that Gujarat has flouted the 40-year-old Narmada Water Distribution Tribunal accord by denying it 57 percent share of the 1,200 MW power generated by the dam. Reeling under severe water crisis, Gujarat too has sought the intervention of the NCA, reiterating that it needs to store water during the monsoon to meet its drinking water and irrigation requirements.

The Narmada is deemed the lifeline of Gujarat as it caters to 80 percent of its drinking water and 45 percent of its irrigation needs. It is also critical for supplying water to parched Saurashtra.

In three letters to the NCA chairman, Madhya Pradesh Chief Secretary SR Mohanty has said that Gujarat has neither supplied power nor paid compensation in lieu of power as was agreed upon in the accord. As a result, the state government is forced to spend an additional Rs 229 crore to purchase power, the letters said.

However, Gujarat Deputy Chief Minister Nitin Patel has clarified that as no hydel power was generated from the dam for the last two years, sharing electricity with MP was out of the question. Gujarat has contended that for testing the gates of the dam, it was essential that it be filled to its optimum level of 138.68 m. The water level has stood at about 124 m for over a week.

The Narmada Valley development minister of Madhya Pradesh, Surendra Baghel, told India Legal that releasing additional water for the dam was fraught with the grave risk of inundating 6,500 families in 76 villages in the catchment area. “Until and unless rehabilitation of the affected families is completed, additional water cannot be released,” he asserted. The state government is worried that relief and rehabilitation (R&R) of thousands of families affected by the project is pending, and if Gujarat fills the dam to its capacity, there would be further submergence of villages.

The dispute between Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh escalated after the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd (SSNNL) sought a nod from NCA to stop power generation in the Riverbed Powerhouse (RBPH) in order to fill the dam to its fullest level. There are two power houses for the Sardar Sarovar Project—a 1,200 MW River Bed Power House and a 250 MW Canal Head Power House. Power generated is shared between Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Gujarat in the ratio of 57:27:16, respectively.

While the Canal Head Power House releases water into the main canal of the dam after generation of power, the water used by the turbines of the RBPH is drained into the sea without being channelled for use. The RBPH has been shut down since June 2017 as Gujarat has been facing a rain deficit.

While the Sardar Sarovar reservoir filled up to 130.75 m in 2017, it reached just below 129 m in 2018. As the reservoir has not been filled to its Full Reservoir Level (FRL), it is impossible to test the dam’s thrust of full capacity. Engineers of the dam say this is essential as construction of the dam lasted close to five decades with a gap of several years. Filling the reservoir is possible only when the RBPH is closed as water used for generating hydro power cannot be reused.

The Madhya Pradesh government has raised an objection to the NCA’s consent to Gujarat to stop hydropower generation at the RBPH until the dam is filled to its FRL level. The NCA had convened a special inter-state meeting in April this year to discuss the issue and advised all states to do their bit for filling the Sardar Sarovar reservoir to its FRL.

After Gujarat suspended power generation, Madhya Pradesh is deprived of more than 700 MW of power every day. Gujarat has offered about Rs 250 crore to it for the loss of power. But Madhya Pradesh wants it to pay an additional Rs 229 core as “opportunity cost” as it was forced to purchase costly power from the market.

Baghel said: “Gujarat wants to create a crisis in Madhya Pradesh. But we will ensure that all the rights of Madhya Pradesh are safeguarded. All the rights of the people in the Narmada Valley, including those of farmers, will be protected.” The minister said that the erstwhile BJP government’s claim of completion of the R&R works was false. “We found that the ground reality is different.” Baghel belongs to Kukshi area in Dhar district where many villages are affected by the project.

Medha Patkar of the Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) said that at least 16,000 people affected by the backwaters of the project are yet to be rehabilitated. According to the NBA estimates, R&R of more than 30,000 people is yet to be done. Petitions of thousands of families are pending with the Grievance Redressal Authority regarding compensation. Patkar has urged the MP government to ensure strict “regulation and monitoring” of the R&R work and to seek Rs 3,600 crore from Gujarat for refusing to give power from RBPH.

Though the issues of compensation for power and rehabilitation are yet to be resolved, Gujarat continues to store water in the dam, while Madhya Pradesh is against discharge of any additional water. Nath has indicated that the state will follow NCA guidelines in letter and spirit. In other words, it will give Gujarat only as much water as stipulated by NCA unlike the past when Madhya Pradesh released more water.

In 2018, Gujarat had mounted pressure on Chouhan to release more water. He was in a spot of trouble as assembly elections were due at the year-end and giving in to Gujarat’s demand could be political hara-kiri. After some dilly-dallying, he caved in despite poor rainfall, badly hitting irrigation. All dams on the Narmada river in Madhya Pradesh—Bargi, Indira Sagar and Omkareshwar—were filled below capacity. When voluntary organisations and the Opposition raised objections to the state’s alleged capitulation, Chouhan indicated that as rehabilitation work of Project Affected Families (PAF) in Narmada’s upstream had been completed, there was nothing objectionable in meeting Gujarat’s demand.

In 2017, Gujarat had tested the dam’s capacity up to 131 m following consent from Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, the other states which are part of the Narmada water-sharing agreement. All three had BJP chief ministers then. Now the Congress government in Madhya Pradesh has dug its heels in and said it will not yield to Gujarat as claims about rehabilitation of the oustees are false. Baghel said that after the Congress took over, irregularities in the R&R process and gaps in funds given by the Gujarat government and the actual requirement were found. He said that Madhya Pradesh would seek more money from Gujarat after fresh survey of the oustees was over. Gujarat has contended that it has already paid Rs 400 crore upfront for the rehabilitation of PAF after the dam height was raised.

Rajiv Gupta, additional chief secretary, forest and environment, and managing director, SSNNL, reportedly said: “We got the permission to construct the dam up to FRL level and even closed the sluice gates only after consent of all three stakeholder states. There was no major issue then.”

If the rain deficit continues in Gujarat, the impasse over water sharing is unlikely to be resolved.

Above: The purpose of the new Act is to empower people against Khap Panchayat diktats/Photo: lawschoolpolicyreview.com

Faced with a spurt in “justice” dispensed by Khap Panchayats, the Congress government in Rajasthan has brought in tough legislation to curb honour killings

By Prakash Bhandari in Jaipur

Rajasthan has in the last five years witnessed 71 cases registered against illegal diktats issued by Khap Panchayats. Of these, 10 resulted in honour killings in which four men and eight women lost their lives. That perhaps explains why during the campaign for the assembly elections last year, the Congress held out the promise to put a curb on such panchayats which are basically caste-based councils that function like Kangaroo courts, quoting honour and tradition to interfere in relationships between young men and women. The Khap Panchayats frequently make pronouncements on social issues, such as abortion, alcohol abuse, dowry, and promoting education, specially among girls. The decision of the Khaps have often triggered honour killings too.

“There has been a spurt in illegal intimidation by self-appointed bodies for bringing pressure against sagotra marriages and inter-caste, inter-community and inter-religious marriages between two consenting adults in the name of vindicating the honour of family, caste or community. Although such intimidation or acts of violence constitute offences under the Indian Penal Code, yet it is necessary to prevent assemblies which take place to condemn such alliances as also to punish such acts of violence and criminal intimidation severely. The Bill seeks to achieve the aforesaid objectives,” said parliamentary affairs minister, Shanti Dhariwal, while introducing The Rajasthan Prohibition of Interference with the Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances in the Name of Honour and Tradition Bill, 2019, in the assembly last month. The assembly passed the Bill on August 5 to curb incidents of honour killings with stringent punishment for murdering couples in the name of family honour. “The government was quick to bring the legislation against the Khap Panchayats to drive home the point that they are not affiliated to the formally elected government or various local or panchayat bodies and have no legal sanctity,” added Dhariwal.

The minister while piloting the Bill in the assembly said that its purpose was to empower people against illegal outfits that use draconian measures to punish adult couples who marry by defying tradition. The Bill mandates the death penalty or imprisonment till death for killing a couple or either of them in the name of honour. It says: “Whoever causes death of a couple or either of them on the basis that marriage of such couple has dishonoured, or brought disrepute to the caste, community or family shall be punished with death, or with imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and with fine which may extend to Rs 5 lakh.” Further, the Bill says that if the couple or either of them is grievously hurt, the punishment shall be extended from ten years’ rigorous imprisonment to imprisonment for life and with fine of maximum Rs 3 lakh, and it will be three to five years of imprisonment with fine which may extend to Rs 2 lakh in case of simple injuries.

According to the Bill, a sub-divisional magistrate or district magistrate shall receive a request or information from any person or persons seeking protection from any unlawful assembly, or from any other person who is likely to or who has been objecting to any lawful marriage. It says that no person or group shall assemble at any time with the view or intention to deliberate on or condemn any marriage not prohibited by law, on the basis that such marriage has dishonoured the caste or community tradition or brought disrepute to all or any of the persons forming part of the assembly or the family or the people of the locality concerned. Such a gathering shall be treated as unlawful and every person convening or organising such assembly, and every member thereof, participating therein directly or indirectly shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term not less than six months, but it may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to Rs 1 lakh.

In March last year, the Supreme Court had declared Khap Panchayats illegal. The Court said that it was illegal for so-called assemblies of village elders to interfere in marriage between two consenting adults and to summon and punish them. The Court also laid down preventive, remedial and punitive measures to stop honour killings. The right of an adult to choose his or her life partner is above “class honour,” a three-judge bench headed by then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra had said. The bench had also laid down guidelines to check unlawful interference in the lives of inter-faith and inter-caste couples by Khap Panchayats and ruled that the guidelines shall remain in force until suitable legislation is enacted by Parliament.

The Rajasthan Assembly which discussed the Bill passed it by a voice vote and it has now become an Act. During the debate, the BJP members opposed the Bill over the death penalty provision. The BJP’s Rajendra Singh Rathor and Girdhari Singh Mahiya said that the provision of the death penalty was too harsh and demanded that it be amended to life imprisonment. After hearing the plea of the Opposition, the government agreed to delete the term “death penalty”.

Rathor, who is also the Deputy Leader of the BJP in the assembly, and party colleague Madan Dilawar said that the Bill will encourage inter-caste marriages which would be harmful to the social fabric of society. The BJP members insisted on removing the term “sagotra” from the Bill. A “sagotra” marriage is one in which the bride and the groom hail from the same clan and sub-caste. Dhariwal agreed to remove the term “sagotra” from the Bill. He said that the Act will come in handy in dealing with Khap Panchayat orders.

As it happened with the SC ruling, the initial reaction of Khaps to the law seemed to be one of defiance.

Above: Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot at an Iftar party in Jaipur/Photo: twitter

In a surprising volte-face, the Congress government in Rajasthan has filed a charge sheet against the lynched man, Pehlu Khan. Will this reckless gamble pay dividends in two crucial byelections?

By Asif Ullah Khan

The naming of Pehlu Khan, a dairy farmer who was lynched by gau rakshaks two years ago in Alwar, in a charge sheet for cow smuggling has raised questions about the policy direction of the Cong­ress and the governance of Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot.

Political observers say the complete reversal of approach to cow vigilantism by the Gehlot government stems from the rout the Congress suffered in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. In Rajasthan, the BJP swept all 25 seats and the chief minister could not even save his son, Vaibhav Gehlot’s seat in his own bastion of Jodhpur. Vaibhav lost to Gajendra Singh Shekhawat (BJP) by 2.75 lakh votes and even lost in his father’s assembly segment of Sardarpura.

Despite his popularity, Gehlot’s image has taken a big hit. His troubles don’t end there as he now faces two crucial byelections which will decide his fate as chief minister. These byelections are because Narendra Kumar Khichar, the sitting BJP MLA from Mandawa assembly constituency, was elected to the Lok Sabha from Jhunjhunu parliamentary seat and Khinvsar MLA Hanuman Beniwal of the Rashtriya Loktantrik Party, who joined the BJP before the Lok Sabha election, won the Nagaur parliamentary seat.

A senior Congress leader, who did not want to be named, told India Legal: “With Congress state chief and Deputy Chief Minister Sachin Pilot breathing down his neck, Gehlot can’t afford to lose these two byelections. It’s a sort of make and break situation for him.” The Congress with 93 seats in the 200-member assembly does not even have a simple majority and has taken the support of independents and BSP MLAs to form the government.

It is in the light of this scenario that Pehlu Khan being named in the charge sheet should be seen. The Congress leader said this was not an administrative lapse as Gehlot also holds the home minister’s portfolio. The charge sheet was prepared on December 30 last year, 13 days after Gehlot took over as chief minister for the third time. Although Gehlot tried to shift the blame on the previous BJP government by saying that the charge sheet was prepared during its tenure, what has surprised human rights activists is the complete silence on the Congress’s part. The party had vowed to reinvestigate the case, especially of the six alleged culprits who were given a clean chit by the police.

Senior journalist and political analyst Anil Sharma told India Legal: “This entire episode shows that the Congress is still continuing with a soft Hindutva approach which started during the Gujarat assembly elections in 2017.” The same approach was seen during the run-up to the Lok Sabha elections in Rajasthan when the Congress organised Rahul Gandhi’s temple run and promised the setting up of cow shelters in its manifesto. “The reason behind this approach is that Gehlot is facing two crucial byelections and the forthcoming panchayat and local body elections,” added Sharma.

Human rights activist Professor Mohammed Hasan concurs with this view. He said that the Congress government had also announced that it would set up a Vedic Shiksha and Sanskar Board in the state to preserve and revive the study of ancient Sanskrit scriptures in order to ensure that the youth have knowledge of the country’s glorious past. “This is their (Congress’s) old tactic. They think that by using this issue, they can win two byelections,” Hasan said.

It is pertinent to mention here that the Modi government had been mulling the establishment of a Vedic Education Board for a while after initially rejecting it. In 2015, Baba Ramdev had requested the government to establish a school board for Vedic education, but the government had rejected the suggestion. In 2016, he made another bid but it was rejected again.

Hasan said the infamous Gopalgarh police firing case in 2011 also happened during Gehlot’s previous tenure in which 10 Muslims were killed and many injured. “That time also, Gehlot, instead of taking action against the police, tried to hoodwink Muslims by raking up the Salman Rushdie issue during the Jaipur Literature Festival,” added Hasan.

He said that instead of filing a charge sheet against a dead man, the Congress government should reinvestigate the entire case as Pehlu Khan had papers for the purchase of the animals. These were snatched from him and torn up by the gau rakshaks. This has been reported in the media.

Calling the FIRs filed against Pehlu Khan and other dairy farmers “motivated” and done with “predetermined intentions”, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has demanded their withdrawal. PUCL’s Rajasthan unit president, Kavita Srivastava, said: “They were genuine dairy farmers and were carrying ravanna (acknowledgement receipt) of the Jaipur Nagar Nigam for the cows they were transporting. They bought the milch cows with the intent of selling milk. The PUCL has also insisted that the police take cognisance of their past milk sales records. It is clear that the deadly attack on them was because they were Muslims.”

There were seven deaths due to lynching in Rajasthan between 2015 and 2018, with five taking place in 2017, said Anant Bhatnagar, Rajasthan general secretary of PUCL. “It is shameful that dairy farmers have to face trial for false cases, when in reality, they are struggling to make ends meet.”

Only time will tell whether the filing of a charge sheet against Pehlu Khan and others will pay political dividends or not. But the unease Muslim leaders are feeling because of this approach is getting louder in the party. Shafia Zubair Khan, a Congress MLA, has written to the chief minister asking him to reinvestigate the case. In a letter which she shared on her Facebook wall, Shafia says: “The entire world knows that Pehlu Khan was not involved in any illegal activity. It was the previous BJP government which had framed him on trumped-up charges of cow smuggling and named him in the charge sheet. I request to reinvestigate all the charges filed during the BJP regime.”

Many Muslim leaders told India Legal that the party’s complete reversal of policy on the issue stems from the soft Hindutva approach it has adopted. It feels that Muslims have nowhere to go and has started taking this community for granted. They say when the Congress was in the opposition, the top party leadership from Gehlot to Pilot called Pehlu Khan’s lynching a murder and vowed to give justice to him and his family. Now, instead of giving any relief to the victims, they have charged them with the offence of cow smuggling.

A senior Muslim leader said: “Today, the chief minister is completely silent on the issue of punishment to the culprits who were given a clean chit by the previous BJP government. We have raised these issues at the party forum but not much attention is given to our grievances. Due to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s hardline and aggressive Hindutva policies, the party feels that by default, the Muslims will vote for the Congress and thinks that through a soft Hindutva approach, it can woo Hindu voters. But this policy is not working as is evident from the rout in the Lok Sabha elections.”

Another Muslim leader said: “Today, the party has no qualms in admitting dissident BJP and RSS leaders. Pratap Singh Khachariyawas, transport minister in the Gehlot cabinet, was once the blue-eyed boy of Vasundhara Raje and head of the youth wing of the BJP. Known BJP and RSS leader Ghanshyam Tiwari was taken into the party in the presence of Congress President Rahul Gandhi before the Lok Sabha elections. Not only Muslims, but many other senior leaders have questioned the party’s policy of competitive Hindutva because they feel it is flawed.” A Muslim leader of the Congress asked: “If we also follow the same policy, how can we say that we are secular and different from the BJP?”

What worries Congress Muslim leaders about the party’s competitive Hindutva is that Muslim fundamentalist and religious organisations are making inroads into the community. They say they are bound by party discipline and cannot express their grievances publicly.

“As in Pehlu Khan’s case, Asaduddin Owaisi’s call to Muslims in Rajasthan to stop supporting the Congress, alleging that the party has betrayed them, has great resonance in the community. People like Owaisi are eating into the Congress’s Muslim vote bank,” said another Muslim leader.

Another senior journalist said that after the rout in the Lok Sabha elections, the Gehlot government has been in total disarray. “Surprisingly, in his third term, the Gehlot government looks incoherent and clueless, which is evident from the lack of floor management and coordination in the state assembly.” He was referring to heated arguments between Rajasthan Assembly Speaker CP Joshi and state parliamentary affairs minister Shanti Dhariwal. The argument broke out after Dhariwal was not allowed by the Speaker to reply to allegations levelled by the BJP. When the minister continued arguing on why the government was not being allowed to reply, the Speaker left his chair and adjourned the House for half an hour.

It looks like Gehlot has more than enough on his plate.

—The writer is a former deputy managing editor of  The Brunei Times

The Congress government in Chhattisgarh faced embarrassment over the arrest of a journalist for an innocuous video and was forced to release him

By Neeraj Mishra in Raipur

There have often been elaborate discussions on Section 124A of the IPC which deals with sedition. Most people agree that it’s a regressive, archaic British-era law which has no place in the present context. Still, it continues to hold its place in the statutes with no clarity on whether it should remain there or some other, more relevant version should be introduced. Its application in present times continues to embarrass governments who use it, as the newly-elected Bhupesh Baghel government found, much to its chagrin.

Mangilal Agarwal, from a small village in Rajnandgaon district of Chhattisgarh, thought he should do his bit for the cause of investigative journalism by releasing a two-minute video ostensibly to “expose” a deal made by the Baghel government with inverter manufacturers. He released his expose on WhatsApp, claiming he had insider knowledge on how electricity authorities had done a deal with inverter companies. He claimed that there were power cuts for 10 minutes every hour so that the consumer would finally get fed up and buy an inverter.

Agarwal’s brainwave was matched by that of the Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board (CSEB) which promptly registered a case against him at the local police station under Sections 124A and 505(1) and (2) for spreading rumours against the government. Advocate NKP Singh who claimed to be the legal adviser to CSEB went on record to say: “It is a very serious matter of spreading rumours against the CSEB and thus the government.” The police also readily filed an FIR—it usually takes days to do so in rape complaints—and arrested Agarwal and recovered his mobile phone which was used to make the video and spread it on WhatsApp.

Whether the case was fit to attract Section 124A is not even debatable as the police should and could have booked Agarwal under a section of the IT Act and the Electricity Act itself. It’s not clear on whose directions it was acting. Some say that the directions came from the top, probably CSEB chairman Shailendra Shukla or even further up. However, Baghel had to step in the next day as the arrest made newspaper headlines. He directed the DGP to withdraw the section dealing with sedition and Agarwal was released from jail after two days.

The use of Section 124A has caused trouble at the beginning of Baghel’s regime. It is something that the Congress had been opposing for the past five years as several such cases have been registered against journalists and activists by the Modi government and in BJP-ruled states. The most famous ones were in Maharashtra where several professors and lawyers have been languishing in jail for the past year under allegations of helping Naxals in urban areas.

“A careful reading of Section 124A should have been done by the SHO in this case before registering a case,” said GP Singh, IGP, Chhattisgarh police. The Section, along with explanations, reads: “Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in [India], shall be punished with  imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine. Explanation 1.—The expression ‘disaffection’ includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity. Explanation 2.—Comments expressing disapprobation of the measures of the Government with a view to obtain their alteration by lawful means, without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section. Explanation 3.—Comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence under this section.”

How a Agarwal from a small village in remote Rajnandgaon can “excite hatred, contempt or disaffection” is beyond comprehension in this particular case, but the Section was meant to subjugate society and keep the subjects under control through threat of law. “It is a misfit in the current democratic set-up and if at all its use is necessary, it has to be done with the utmost discretion. Random use of it just because it is in the IPC can cause a lot of bad blood,” said Vivekanand, a senior lawyer.

But as it exists, its use is legal, though its severity or inapplicability will come into question only later in the courts in individual cases.

Sections 124A and 505 are often clubbed together, mostly in cases against journalists and activists who happen to circulate pamphlets, etc. In Agarwal’s case, Sections 505 (1) and (2) have been applied and in some manner are more relevant and perhaps more punitive. The case is going on and if he is found guilty, he could spend five years behind bars, though he may not carry the same stigma that sedition brings. A plain reading of Section 505 can send a chill down any journalist or social media user’s spine.

It says: “Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement, rumour or report,—(b) with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public whereby any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquility.”

The Indian state can build a case against anyone at the drop of a hat if it feels so inclined. The Section can also be used to effectively silence any murmur of dissidence, as Agarwal has learnt. He is so threatened and scared after spending just two days behind bars that he has disowned his video, apologised and even disowned his own BJP links. In a letter to Baghel, he stated that some BJP leaders were inciting him to file counter cases against the CSEB but “I have told them clearly that my case is now being handled by the CM and he will decide”.

His case might soon be forgotten by everyone but what will always irk the Congress is that it had advocated the abrogation of Section 124A in its election manifesto and when the time came, its own government was found employing it.

You might also be interested in:

• Millionaire Wedding in Uttarakhand: Double Trouble
• Home Buyers: Take a Fair Stand
• National Anti-Profiteering Authority: Serving its Purpose
• Lateral Entry: Dismembering Bureaucracy

The Puducherry Lt Gov Kiran Bedi won a victory of sorts when the Supreme Court held on Tuesday that the Congress government in the Union Territory cannot implement any decision involving financial implications of transfer of officials.

Puducherry has been witnessing a turf war between the LG appointed by the NDA government and the local government and only recently, the Madras High Court had recently held that Bedi “cannot interfere” in the day-to-day affairs of the elected government there. The SC order came on an urgent plea by the Centre and the LG’s office regarding control over bureaucrats in the wake of a turf war between the LG and the local government. The Bench also issued notice to the elected government and allowed the Cabinet to meet on June 7, but said that decisions with serious financial implication and transfers cannot be implemented till the next date of hearing . Appearing for the Puducherry government, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal objected that the direction by the court to temporarily halt Cabinet decisions was tantamount to a virtual stay on the Madras High Court decision, which had curbed the LG’s powers to interfere in the day-to-day administration of the Union Territory, especially when an elected government was in place. But the court did not relent. The Central authorities said the high court decision had brought the “administrative machinery of Puducherry to an impasse” and required urgent rectification.

The LG and the government had earlier clashed over the issue of nominated MLAs to the assembly and distribution of food to BPL families, both issues that finally called for judicial intervention.

—India Legal Bureau