Site news

DON'T TRY TO PLAY LAWMAKER, SC TELLS JUDGES THE COURTS CANNOT ADD WORDS TO A STATUTE OR READ WORDS THAT ARE NOT THERE

 
 
Picture of System Administrator
DON'T TRY TO PLAY LAWMAKER, SC TELLS JUDGES THE COURTS CANNOT ADD WORDS TO A STATUTE OR READ WORDS THAT ARE NOT THERE
by System Administrator - Friday, 23 December 2016, 6:19 AM
 

By: M.S.Yatnatti: Editor and Video Journalist Bengaluru: Judges should not exhibit "judicial valour" by passing sweeping orders that encroach on the domain of the executive and legislature as the separation of powers among the organs of the state must be honoured, the Supreme Court has reportedly said .A bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Amitava Roy said the power to enact a law has not been conferred on the judiciary and the courts cannot add words to a statute or read words that are not there into it and expressed concern over increasing instances of courts dabbling in policy and law-making. The SC said: "The judges should not proclaim that they are playing the role of a lawmaker merely for exhibition of judicial valour. They have to remember that there is a line, though thin, which separates adjudication from legislation. That line should not be crossed or erased." It held the court cannot issue any direction to the legislature to make law because under the constitutional scheme, Parliament and legislative assemblies exercise sovereign power to enact laws and no outside power or authority can issue a direction to enact a particular piece of legislation.

State can file recall application before Division bench in cases of G category which have gone against it.Request was made to Jayachnadra the law minister to issue an "official note” and he has issued an "official note” on our request on 11-12-2015 directing Principal Secretary UDD to scrutinize and act as per law ON our request and act accordingly in respect of our request to file an affidavit in HKHC in WP 23475/2010 C/WWP 1032/2006 and WP 36275/2009 (BDA PIL) stating that " Earlier Government had no power to allot G Category sites and Government took power to allot G category sites retrospectively by way of amendment to Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of site)(Amendment) rules 2015 which in turn amends BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 by "substitution” of new rule 5 in place of old rule 5 as HKHC order in WP 23475/2010 C/WWP 1032/2006 and WP 36275/2009 (BDA PIL) had grantedliberty to the Government to frame appropriate rules in accordance with law. Mr K J George Bengaluru Development Ministerand UDD department has failed to take up follow up action after amendment and amendment was not communicated to high court as All MLAs MPs Ministers and social workers who have been allotted G Category sites by Government or have Government allotment letters but sites were not allotted by BDA stands to get the benefit by the Gazette notification No UDD 475 MNJ 2014 ,Banagaluru Dated 20-05-2015 which is effective retrospectively since 1984 as rule 5 is substituted in Rule 5 of BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984.

Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of site)(Amendment) rules 2015 have been published by the Gazette notification No UDD 475 MNJ 2014 ,Banagaluru Dated 20-05-2015 which has come into force from the 20-05-2015the date on which it is published in the official gazette of Government of Karnataka . This amendment of Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of site)(Amendment) rules 2015 which in turn amends BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 by "substitution” of new rule 5 in place of old rule 5 . Which makes this amendment effective retrospectively since BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 is amended by BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 2015 as rule 5 is "substituted” in Rule 5 of BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984. "The word 'substitute' ordinarily would mean 'to put (one) in place of another', or 'to replace'. In Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, at page 1281, the word 'substitute' has been defined to mean 'To put in the place of another person or thing', or 'to exchange'. In Collins English Dictionary, the word 'substitute' has been defined to mean 'to serve or cause to serve in place of another person or thing'; 'to replace (an atom or group in a molecule) with (another atom or group)"; or 'a person or thing that serves in place of another, such as a player in a game who takes the place of an injured colleague'." This amendment was made as per HKHC order in WP 23475/2010 C/WWP 1032/2006 and WP 36275/2009 (BDA PIL) as liberty was reserved to the Government to frame appropriate rules in accordance with law as it was said in the order that Government has no power to allot G Category sites and Government took power to allot G category sites retrospectively by way ofamendment toBangalore Development Authority (Allotment of site)(Amendment) rules 2015 amends BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 by "substitution” of new rule 5 in place of old rule 5.In view of this amendment UDD Department is duty bound to inform the HKHC in WP 23475/2010 C/W WP 1032/2006 and WP 36275/2009 (BDA PIL) that earlier Government had no power to allot G Category sites and Government took power to allot G category sites retrospectively by way of amendment to Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of site)(Amendment) rules 2015 which in turn amends BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 by "substitution” of new rule 5 in place of old rule 5.

With this order of HKHC in WP 23475/2010 C/W WP 1032/2006 and WP 36275/2009 (BDA PIL) becomes infractous as Government has complied the order in letter and spirit and consequently can seek HKHC for winding up of the Justice Farouque Committee constituted for the purpose of this as according to court order government has complied the HKHC order in WP 23475/2010 C/W WP 1032/2006 and WP 36275/2009 (BDA PIL) and framed appropriate rules in accordance with law and committee became redundant .Public are free to file individual cases against G category allottee if any individual allotment is found to be illegal in view of New amendment toBangalore Development Authority (Allotment of site)(Amendment) rules 2015 amends BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 by "substitution” of new rule 5 in place of old rule 5 making all allotments and Government orders allotting G category ordersbecame legal .All MLAs MPs Ministers and social workers who have been allotted G Category sites by Government or have Government allotment letters but sites were not allotted by BDA stands to get the benefit by the Gazette notification No UDD 475 MNJ 2014 ,Banagaluru Dated 20-05-2015 which is effective retrospectively since 1984 as rule 5 is "substituted” in Rule 5 of BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984. In view of the Gazette notification No UDD 475 MNJ 2014 ,Banagaluru Dated 20-05-2015 which is effective retrospectively from 1984 as rule 5 is "substituted” inRule 5 of BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 (substitution makes the law effective retrospectively from the Rules 1984) ,Request for Allotment of G category site to Mr M.S.Rajshekhar Social worker and Congress leader as per Government order Number UDD 407 BLA 2005dated 27-01-2006 which is valid as per above cited amendment and substitution of rules & as per BDA Act 1976 and Rule 5 of BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 as per section (9) and complying with the guidelines issued by the government in that regard from time to time. With amendment of Rule 5 of BDA (Allotment of sites) Rules 1984 the court orders became infractuous and government should file an affidavit stating that Government has regained power of allotment of G-Category sites through amendment retrospectively and can seek HKHC for winding up of the Committee constituted for the purpose of this as according to court order government has complied the HKHC order in WP 23475/2010 C/W WP 1032/2006 and WP 36275/2009 (BDA PIL) and framed appropriate rules in accordance with law.