The hullabaloo over AFSPA is deafening

Gen (retd) VP Malik’s Article “Revisiting AFSA:Don’t blame it for Kashmir problems”, The Tribune, New Delhi, Sept 20, was enlightening and gave an apt snapshots of the various provisions of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act, 1958 (AFPSA) vis-à-vis its need in view of the extant disturbed, subversive conditions in many parts of the Country, and its practical utility and efficacy. The real thorn in the flesh of the problem lies in the socio-politico-economic grievances of the people and the political authorities concerned only can address it. To pass the buck on the Armed Forces for the present vitiated state of affairs is highly reprehensible and self-defeating.
The AFSPA arms the security forces with sweeping powers that are absolutely necessary to pulverize the diabolic designs of the subversive element in the disturbed areas. Amongst others, the whipping boy is the Para 6 of the AFSPA. It confers some protection to the members of the security forces deployed in the disturbed areas against frivolous prosecutions etc. inasmuch that prior sanction of the Central Government is mandatory before any prosecution, suit or legal proceeding is instituted against them for any alleged acts of commission or omission done under the AFSPA . The detractors of the AFSPA must know that even an ordinary public servant, while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duty, enjoys largely similar protections under the general law of the land. Even in the absence of the AFSPA , the members of the armed forces will enjoy somewhat identical protection as envisaged in said Para 6, under section 197 (2) of the code of criminal procedure.
The need of hour is to chalk out cogent and comprehensive roadmap to redress the grievances of the aggrieved people in the disturbed areas. However, the security forces require potent legal cover, optimal logistics support and adequate operational freedom to crush the menace of terrorism and insurgency.

Retirement age of the Judges and independence of Higher Judiciary

The Sunday Tribune, New Delhi, Sept 26, 2010, P. 12
Raising judges’ tenure will strengthen judicial independence
Justice A.R. Lakshmanan’s article, “Retirement of judges: Raise the age to streamline the higher judiciary” (Sunday Oped, Aug 29) was thought-provoking. The increase in the retirement age of the judges of higher judiciary will have a profound bearing on the judicial independence.
The retired judges are offered government employment of some kind or other which may subject some of them to extraneous consideration and thus undermine judicial independence.
It is more so in view of the constitutional embargo prohibiting a retired Supreme Court and High Court judge to practice law before any court or authority in India and in the High Court(s) where he held office as a permanent judge respectively. In the US, a Supreme Court Judge holds office during good behaviour, which means that he can continue to occupy office for life. Of course, a judge is at liberty to retire on attaining the age of 70 years and on completing ten years of service at the Supreme Court.
The Constitution Amendment Bill in the Lok Sabha to raise the retirement age of High Court Judges from 62 to 65 is laudable but not adequate. Either the Constitution should be amended on the lines of the American Constitution or the retirement age of judges be fixed at 70 years in consonance with the normal life expectancy in India.
RAJENDER GOYAL, Advocate, Bahadurgarh

QUOTA BLUES

THR TRIBUNE, NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER, 23, 2010, P. 10
Quota blues
Apropos of the editorial, “Quota conundrum” (Sept 15), the founding fathers’ idea of reservation was like that of the crutches lent to a physically challenged person until his limbs grow up and he stands on his own legs. The time has come for a review of the entire policy on quotas. The quota based reservation policy, a part of the affirmative action, envisaged as a tool of egalitarianism now stands catapulted as a ‘prized booty’.
The common refrain of the protagonists of the Jat reservation is that when some other peasantry castes in Haryana already enjoy the benefits of the reservation, why the Jats should be deprived of the same? The remedy lies in not giving quotas to any such caste.
RAJENDER GOYAL, Advocate, Bahadurgarh

NOTE:-In the above write-up published in "The Tribune". I have been misquoted in certain material aspect in so far as the assertion "The remedy lies is not giving quotas to any such caste" is concerned. In fact, I had used the expression "The remedy lies in disentitling any of such caste to reap the fruits of the reservation, if found, that they do not qualify for it" in the original write-up sent to The Tribune for publication . The flawed paraphrasing has resulted into total misconstruction of my perspective on this count.

The original write-up sent to "The Tribune" is reproduced below:

Bandwagon of reservation
Apropos the editorial “Quota conundrum: Hooda again mishandles situation”, Sept 15, the Founding Fathers’ idea of reservation policy was like that of the crutches lent to a limbless person until his limbs grow up and he stands on his own legs. The time has come at such a pass, paradoxically, where we see that the erstwhile limbless person, now having fully grown-up limbs, does not want to let go of the borrowed crutches, and the inherently able-bodied person has started clamouring for the crutches. The quota based reservation policy- a part of the affirmative action- envisaged as a tool of egalitarianism now stands catapulted as a ‘prized booty’. The common refrain of the protagonists of the jat reservation is that some other peasantry castes in Haryana already enjoy the benefits of the reservation, then, why jat should not be? Two wrongs do not make a right they constitute a plumb blunder. The remedy lies in disentitling any of such caste to reap the fruits of the reservation, if found, that they do not qualify for it. Be that as it may be, we must be alive to the hard fact that reservation is a state’s charity and it is highly unbecoming of any self-respecting person to live off anybody’s alms unless it is not at all possible to stand on one's own legs due to some insurmountable present or historical reasons.
RAJENDER GOYAL, Advocate
Bahadurgarh

Recent approval and derecognition of Law Institutes in India

The Meeting of the Legal Education Committee of the Bar Council of India was held on Saturday, 4th September, 2010 at 10.30 A.M. and on Sunday, 5th September, 2010 at 10.30 A.M. at the premises of the Bar Council of India, 225, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-III, New Delhi. In the said meeting the Vaish College of Law, Rohtak was granted permission to commence admission process. Quite shockingly, the Institute of Law & Management Studies, MDU, Gurgaon (one of the finest law institute in Haryana) has been derecognized allegedly for offering allurements to the Office of Chairman, BCI by the incharge of the Institute. Since the said Institute is a an University maintained Institute, the alleged allurements must have some non-pecuniary connotations!
The record of minutes is reproduced as follows:
Vaish College of Law, Rohtak, Haryana
Perused the report of Vaish College of Law, Rohtak, Haryana.
Permission is granted to commence a three year law course with
two sections of 60 students for two years 2010-2011 and 2011-
2012. Similarly, permission is granted for two sections of 60
students each for B. A. LL.B. 5 year law course. However, the said
college is directed to supply information to the DLE on the teaching
plan, the syllabus to be followed as well as fair and transparent
process be adopted for the admission of the students. The said
admission of students will take place under the supervision of the
Professor in Charge of the Campus Law Centre, Delhi University.
Institute of Law & Magmt. Studies, Maharishi Dayanand
University, Gurgaon, Haryana
Having regard to the fact that the in-charge of this institution
attempted to offer allurements to the Office of Chairman, Bar
Council of India, the said application is rejected. This institution
will not be recognized by the Bar Council of India. Office is
directed to maintain a list of all the promoters of the institution. If
a new institution promoted by the said persons applies for
recognition, office will put-up a note of the present resolution.

Jindal Global Law School, O. P. Jindal Global University,
Sonipat, Haryana
Having regard to the material as well as the inspection report,
there is no manner of doubt that the Jindal Law School is
maintaining standards and imparting legal education of high
quality. Under the circumstances, approval is granted for B.A.
LL.B. (Hons.) 5 year course and LL.B. (Hons.) 3 year course for the
years 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. The existing sections may be
maintained.
(SOURCE: http://www.barcouncilofindia.org/)

The following law colleges were dercognised:
The MOM of the Legal Education Committee of the BCI conducted on 30th April, 2010 de-recognises
Bihar Institute of Law, Patna
Ram Kumari Ayodhya Law College, Begusarai, Bihar
ITM University and ITM Law School, Gurgaon, Haryana
Anugrah Memorial Law College, Gaya, Bodh Gaya, Bihar
S. S. S. Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Women’s Law College, CIDCO, Aurangabad
S. S. S. Devjibhai Hariya Law College, Kalyan, Distt- Thane, Maharashtra
Namdevraoji Parjane Patil Law college, Kopargaon, Distt- Ahmednagar, Maharashtra
Utrakhand Technical University, Uttrakhand
The MOM of the Legal Education Committee of the BCI conducted on 21st and 22nd August, 2010 de-recognises the following law colleges-
S. S. S. Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Women’s Law College, CIDCO, Aurangabad
S. S. S. Devjibhai Hariya Law College, Kalyan, Distt- Thane, Maharashtra
Namdevraoji Parjane Patil Law College, Kopargaon, Distt-Ahmednagar, Maharashtra
Hutama Rajguru Shikshan Prasarak Mandal’s (HRSPM) Law College, Rajgurunagar, Pune
Hurakadli Ajja Law College, Dharwad, Karnataka
B. M. Law College, Muzaffarnagar
Bharti Vidyapeeth’s New Law College, Kolhapur
5 year course withdrawn
P. S. Raju Law College, Kakinada, A.P.
Rajiv Gandhi Institute of Law, Kakinada
3 year course withdrawn
Prasunna College of Law, Kurnool
Yashwantrao Chavan Law College, Karad
5 year course withdrawn
Department of Law, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar University, Srikakulam, Etcherla, A. P.
P. E. S. Modern Law College, Pune
3 year course withdrawn
Manjra Charitable Trust’s College of Law, Navi Mumbai
Maa Jinwani College of Legal Studies, Pushpgiri Treeth, Sonkatch, M.p
College of Law, D. N. R. College Association, Bhimavaram, A.P
5 year course withdrawn
S. I. P. E. Law College, Dibrugarh, Assam
The MOM of the Legal Education Committee of the BCI conducted on 4th and 5th September, 2010 de-recognises the following law colleges-
Shri V. P. K. Mandal’s Pravin Gandhi College of Law, Vile Parle, Mumbai, Maharashtra
Seth Shankarlal Lahoti Law College, Gulbarga, Karnataka
Smt. Sonia Gandhi Law College, Gulbarga, Karnataka
Jawahar Law College, Yadgir
Karnataka Law College, Gulbarga
H. C. E. S. Law College, Gadag
Shri B. R. Mirdha Govt. College agaur, Rajasthan (STBC)
Government Law College, Sirohi, Rajasthan
Government P.G. College, Datia, Madhya Pradesh
Centre for Juridical Studies, Dibrugarh University, Dibrugarh
Maharani Laxmi Bai Govt. College of Excellence, Gwalior
D. H. S. K. Law College, Dibrugarh
Dr. R. K. Baruah Law College, Dibrugarh
Institute of Law & Magmt. Studies, Maharishi Dayanand University,Gurgaon, Haryana
Saraswati Law College, Chitrdurga, Karnataka
Virendra Kumar Singhal Law College, Moradabad, U.P.
Marwadi Siksha Samithi Law College, Hyderabad, A.P.
Visakha Law College, Visakhapatnam
Veeravali College of Law, Prakash Nagar, Rajamundry
However the Legal Education Committee re-considered the matters of the following law colleges which were decided by the Committee at its meeting held on 21st and 22nd August, 2010 and modified as follows-
Bharti Vidyapeeth’s New Law College, Kolhapur
5 year law course allowed
Maa Jinwani College of Legal Studies, Pushpgiri Treeth, Sonkatch, M.P.
3 year law course allowed
Sridhar University, Pilani, Rajasthan
(SOURCE:www.barandbench.com)

Injudiciousness and perfunctoriness over Haryana judicial service examination

The controversies, apathy and dilly-dallying has become endemic to the Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC). The whole gamut of the selection process is shrouded by an eerie sense of distrust, secrecy and panic. The sore points are umpteen.
Timely steps are required to be taken for determination of vacancies, issue of advertisement, conducting examinations, interviews, declaration of the final results and issue of orders of appointments. For all these and other steps, if any, it is necessary to provide for fixed time schedule so that system works automatically and there is no delay in filling up of vacancies.
On the contrary, the notifications that are issued for selection for particular posts/services do not specify the date(s) of the holding of the examination. The candidates are left in lurch for months end on just surmising about the time of the examination. Anyhow, if the examinations take place, unpredictability about the declaration of result ensues. And with the declaration of the result, commences the plight of the successful candidates because, more often than not, the result will be found impugned in the High Court/Supreme Court for some alleged irregularities/improprieties in the selection process/examination.
For the selection of suitable candidates for appointment in HCS (Judicial Branch), the HPSC conducted preliminary examination on 11.07.2010 in accordance with the provisions contained in the Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1951 as amended from time to time. In just less than a week, the result came out enlisting the name of the successful candidates found eligible to take the main examination. Expectedly, the said result also wadded into troubled water since the HPSC and Selection Committee, Punjab and Haryana High Court were hauled up by some unsuccessful candidates in the Punjab and Haryana High Court over some grave irregularities in the question paper and answer key. It is noteworthy that both High Court and the State government (read here HPSC) are jointly responsible for the smooth conduct of the judicial service examination as mandated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Malik Mazhar Sultan v. UP Public Service Commission (2006). The Punjab civil service (Judicial Branch) Rules, 1951 as amended in February 2010, ordain that the HCS (Judicial Branch) Examination is to be conducted by a selection committee consisting of three senior judges of the High Court and equal number of state government official and Chariman of HPSC (Haryana Govt. Gazette Notification No. GSR 3/Const/Art 234 and 309/ 2010 dated 10 Feb 2010).
Before the single judge bench of the High Court, the counsels of the HPSC and the High Court conceded some goof-ups. To protect the paramount interests of the examinees, the single judge bench of His Lordship Justice Ajay Lamba on 13.09.2010 directed the Selection Committee of the Punjab & Haryana High Court and HPSC to constitute an Empowered Committee to look into the grievances of the petitioners and redraft the answer key, recheck the papers of all the candidates, and prepare merit list afresh accordingly. In the flagrant violation of the said decision of the High Court, without undertaking any such exercise, the HPSC notified the schedule for Main Examinations to be held from 1st Oct to 3rd Oct. While the aggrieved candidates were fuming and fretting at the contumacy of the HPSC, the successful candidates were also on tenterhooks, and in a state of paranoia about the legal sanctity of the scheduled examination. In meanwhile, Punjab & Haryana High Court through its Registrar went in Letter Patent Appeal (intra court appeal) before the division bench against the said single bench decision. In deference to the decisions by Their Lordship Justices M.M. Kumar and Ritu Bahri on 22.09.2010 and 27.09.2010 in the above noted case, the Answer Key was rectified and the merit list was published accordingly. Consequently, it occasioned the induction of 45 odd more candidates in the Merit List. Quite shockingly, there was no deferment in the schedule of examination (1st Oct- 3rd Oct 2010) in spite of the fact that 45 new candidates came to find place in the merit list on 27.09.2010 0nly. Will the concerned authorities take pain to enlighten on as to how it is feasible to brace up for an examination for the post of the Civil Judges-cum-Judicial Magistrates on a short notice of just four days only?

My wife's note of circumspection on the caste census

The Tribune, New Delhi, September 15, 2010, P. 10
CASTE CENSUS MUST HAVE A PURPOSE
The Cabinet approval for an independent caste count to be conducted from June to September 2011 is uncalled for (news report, “Cabinet nod to caste count in census”, Sept 10). It is noteworthy that in India more than 300 million people are languishing below poverty level. At least 35 million children aged 6-14 years do not attend school and over three million children are living on the streets, and over 150 million children are working as bonded labourers and so on.
Against this backdrop, the move of the government to spend a whopping sum of Rs 2,000 crore on caste census just to pander to some vested interests to help them accomplish their narrow partisan ends is unwarranted.
The huge amount of taxpayers’ money can be utilised to assuage the plight of millions of hapless and impoverished people. Moreover, there are serious doubts on any objective usefulness of this costly drill since in India the same caste bears different tags in different parts of the country. Anyhow, the caste census should be broad-based enlisting the income and the means of livelihood, etc. of the people of different castes so that it may serve the intended purpose.
NEETI GOYAL, Bahadurgarh

Do'nt tinker with the present policy of appointment of the Chief Justice of a High Court from outside the State

The present policy of appointing the Chief Justice of a High Court from outside the state is the part and parcel of the policy to have one-third of the puisne judges of a High Court from outside a state. It has come in place after a very serious and prolonged deliberations at very various fora viz. the Constituent Assembly, State Reorganization Commission, 14 Report of Ist Law Commission of India (LCI) headed by the then Attorney-General of India, Sh. M.C. Setalvad, Administrative Reform Commission and the 80th Report of the 8th LCI headed by the eminent Mr.justice H.R. Khanna. The present policy also finds approval from the decisions of the Supreme Court of the India [S.P. Gupta Vs UOl , AIR 1982 SC 149 (1st Judges case) and Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association V s UOl, AIR 1994 SC 268 (11nd Judges case)]. The Constituent Assembly debates indicate that the High Court Judges were intended to constitute an All India Cadre.
The most common grouse against the present policy is that chief justice from outside is not familiar with the local Bar, traditions, language and the practices and rules of the new High Court, and the judges of the subordinate judiciary. The Supreme Court in the case of S.C. Advocate on record Association v. Union of India adverted to this and opined that:
“It may be desirable to transfer in advance the senior-most Judge due for appointment as Chief Justice to the High Court where he is likely to be appointed Chief Justice, to enable him to take over as Chief Justice as soon as the vacancy arises and, in the meantime, acquaint himself with the new High Court. This would ensure a smooth transition without any gap in filling the office of Chief Justice”. (AIR 1994 SC 268 at P. 440)
The recent transfer of Justice Ranjan Gogoi from Gauhati High Court to the Punjab and Haryana High Court is in conformity with the said opinion of the Apex Court and needs to be replicated invariably in every case.
Moreover, while denouncing the present policy of transfer, we should not lose sight of the rampant scourge of the “uncle judges” that is sullying the hallowed edifice of judiciary and creating fatal cleavages in its image of non-partisanship.
However, the new Chief Justice should be given a long enough stint to enable him to find feet in the new High Court. It is also imperative that Constitution amendment Bill, 2010 introduced by the government in the Lok Sabha in the last monsoon session to raise the retirement age of High Court Judges from 62 to 65 be made into law forthwith.
POST SCRIPT:-
Reportedly, in a departure from two-decade-old practice, the SC collegium has recommended the appointment of Andhra High Court Chief Justice Nissar Ahmed Kakru as the Chief Justice of the high court of J& K, which is his home state. The SC collegium is understand to have decided to send the present Chief Justice of the High Court of the J&K High Court, Aftab Hussain Saikia, to the Gauhati High Court as its Chief Justice in his home state of Assam, replacing Chief Justice Madan Lokur, who is being transferred to the Andhra High Court. (As reported in Hindustan Times, New Delhi, Sept 15, 2010, P. 8)

Justice A.R. Lakashmanan is factually incorrect

In the article “Appointing Chief Justices: The way out (The Tribune, New Delhi, Sept 13, p. 9), the Justice A.R. Lakshmanan’s (retired Judge, Supreme Court of India and former Chairman, Law Commission of India) observation that “The Collegium is now to consist of the Chief Justice of India and four seniormost Judges of the court and in the appointment of a High Court Judge, the Supreme Court Judge acquainted with that particular High Court should also be consulted raising the number to six” is factually incorrect. As a matter of fact and record, in the case of appointment of High Court Judges, the collegium consists of the Chief Justice of India and the two senior-most puisne Judges of the Supreme Court. In arriving at any decision, the collegium has to elicit the views, amongst others, of colleagues on the Supreme Court Bench “who are conversant with the affairs of the concerned High Court” (kindly advert to paras 26, 27 and 41of the celebrated case, In Re: Presidential Reference, AIR 1999 Supreme Court 1).
Interestingly, the memorandum of procedure qua appointment of the judges in High Courts drawn by the Ministry of Law and Justice seemingly in deference to the opinion of the Supreme Court in the case of S.C. Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 268, para 501, sub para 13 at p. 439 (also known as Second Judges Case) sets out that
“The Chief Justice of India would send his recommendation for the appointment of a puisne Judge of the High Court as Chief Justice of that High Court or of another High Court, in consultation with the two seniormost Judges of the Supreme Court. He would also ascertain the views of the seniormost colleague in the Supreme Court who is conversant with the affairs of the High Court in which the recommendee has been functioning and whose opinion is likely to be significant in adjudging the suitability of the candidate.”
It is noteworthy that whereas the said memorandum is restrictive in a sense that it circumscribes the consultation only with the seniormost colleague ……. and there is no such limitation expressed in the opinion of the Supreme Court in the Re Presidential case as above indicated.
In fact, His Lordship’s observation about the composition of the collegium holds good regarding the appointments of the judges in the Supreme Court and the transfer of the judges of the High Courts with an addition that said collegium has also to seek the views of the Chief Justice of the High Court from which the transfer is to be effected and of the Chief Justice of the High Court to which the transfer is to be effected.
It is also pertinent to mention here that Justice A.R. Lakshamanan is the author of the 18TH Law Commission of India (LCI), 214th Report on "Proposal for Reconsideration of Judges cases I, II and III - S.P. Gupta Vs UOl reported in AIR 1982 SC 149, Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association V s UOl reported in 1993 (4) SCC 441 and Special Reference 1 of 1998 reported in 1998 (7) SC 739". The recommendations of this report also stands reiterated in the later 230th Report of LCI.
The record needs to be set straight.

Revamp of legal education system in India

There are around 900 recognised institutes, including 12 national law schools and 145 departments of law in various universities in India imparting the legal education. However, barring the national law schools and some other handful of the institutes, the modalities and standards of legal education provided therein neither prepares the students enough to take up the legal practice and consultancy effectively nor it is good enough to let them to face up to the contemporary needs and challenges in the domain of modern legal profession. The reasons are not very far to seek. The legal education as imparted in most of the law institutes in India largely acquaints the students with abstract theoretical aspects of law not giving desired emphasis on its procedural and practical aspects. Consequently, the fresh law graduates when they join the legal profession find themselves landed up in an alien world not able to apply the knowledge and skill acquired in the law institutes on real world problems.
To bridge the gap between theory and practice, there should be a well laid out and broad based collaboration between the law institutes and the bar & bench. There must be exceedingly greater objective focus on the procedural laws, and clinical and practical aspects of law viz. court visits primarily aimed at pre-trial preparation & participation in trial proceedings, visit of quasi-judicial bodies, Parliament, police stations, jails, NHRC, NWC, SC/ST Commission,revenue courts, offices of registrar of companies, firms, societies, trade mark, patent, copyright; moot court, mock parliament, free legal aid cell, drafting etc. with the active involvement of the competent members of the bar and the bench, and other specialized consultants and attorneys in various branches of laws. To a certain extent, most of the universities curricula provide for them, but practically not taken with the earnestness as it calls for and virtually pooh-poohed as not being worthwhile for the law students at the stage when they are still pursuing their course. As a corollary, it takes years end on for the new entrants to get acclimatized to the dynamics and imperatives of the legal profession.
Moreover, holding of the Lok Adalats in the Law institutes and latter’s participation also in the other variants of Alternative Dispute resolution (ADR) like mediation, conciliation will also be in the fitness of the things. The most of the faculty members of law institutes are thoroughbred academicians divorced from practical nitty-gritty of law. Hence, it will also be desirable to provide for various measures for them also as in the case of law students so that they will augment their practical insights about the law and its application and thus, we may have true academic lawyers. The supplementing of key course papers with mandatory assignments/research papers, the problem-oriented examination, and also the periodic revision and up-gradation of curricula to catch up with emerging new trends & areas of the legal discipline is also imperative to raise the bar of the legal education. It is also imperative to devise an innovative, interactive and participatory teaching methodology.
The LL.B. courses (both 3 years and 5 years) offered by the various law institutes are general in nature. There should be some degree of specialisation at the level of LL.B. itself. For this, later parts of the said courses should consist of elective subjects only and should be followed by an intense internship/apprenticeship in the chosen field of the specialisation. The discontinuation of LL.B. 3 YEARS Course also merits serious contemplations. While retaining the LL.B. 5 years course, the introduction of a new integrated course of the duration of 6 years [B.A. (LAW)-LL.B.-LL.M.] may be in sync with the extant demand of the time.
The above-suggested measures postulate that there is an otherwise competent and dedicated faculty supported by all necessary infrastructure and other paraphernalia in a law institute.
“We do have a small number of dynamic and outstanding law schools, but I am afraid they remain islands of excellence amidst a sea of institutionalized mediocrity,” rued Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on the quality of legal education in a two-day conference on Second Generation Reforms held recently in New Delhi.
The proposed National Law School Bill, 2010 envisaging the establishment of national law schools in all the states in India is welcome. The biannual All India Bar Examination (to be held on December 5, 2010 for the first time) aimed to test the worth of the candidate seeking entry in the legal profession is also a step in right direction. The need of the hour is to emulate the standards and excellence cultivated and nurtured by the national law schools for other law institutes in India also and usher in dramatic reforms and improvement in the scope and quality of legal education system in India.

Thoroughly monumental, colossal, awesome and par excellent

The Tribune, New Delhi, Haryana plus, P. 2, September 10, 2010
Reetika Singh tops LL.M exam (sic) (read LL.B. Exam)
Tribune News Service
Hisar, September 9
Reetika Singh, an alumnus of the local CR Law College, has bagged the first position in the LL.M (three-year course) (Sic) [read LL.B. (three- year course) examination conducted by Kurukshetra University.
She topped the merit list for all three years consecutively, scoring 1905 marks out of 2800. The gap between her aggregate score and the student placed second in the list is 79 marks.
She had earlier bagged the first prize in an inter-university mock court competition.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HATS OFF TO YOU Reetika. You and only you were cut out for it. Keep on adding more coveted feathers in your illustrious cap.
RAJENDER GOYAL, Bahadurgarh

Judicial bashing is unfortunate

Each organ of the state should function in conformity with the basic spirit of the Constitution and in accordance with its provision in a way that centrality and the supremacy of the Constitution is preserved at all times to help the system to work smoothly and efficiently. The Constitution has entrusted the executive with the task of policy-making and its due execution. However, the moot point is that if the government of the day becomes oblivious of its constitutional duties, whether the judicial wing of the state -that is the custodian of the Constitution -can chip in and awake the government from a state of inertia typified by total abdication of its duty towards the people.
Allowing the millions of tons of food grains, procured at the heavy expenses of the state exchequer, to rot for years end on in the face of millions of starving people throughout the length and the breadth of the Country is nothing but ruthless trampling upon the spirit of the Constitution besides being highly inhumane and barbaric. The empathy of the Apex Court with the starving poor men on the streets amidst queasy stink of putrefying of millions of tons of food grains from all across the Country should not be denounced as judicial overstepping in the domain of the executive. The Prime Minister of India owes a public apology to the nation on this emotive issue of "FOOD CRISIS" juxtaposed with spine-chilling "GRAIN DRAIN" and should assure the countrymen that not even a single grain of the food wll be let to be rotten in a Country where over 37% of the population is still reeling under below poverty line.

Independent caste census is sheer splurge of tax payers' money

In the wake of the recommendation of the Group of Ministers headed by the Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee, the Home Ministry has sought cabinet approval for an independent caste count to be conducted around June 2011. It is noteworthy that in India more than 300 million people are languishing below poverty level, at least 35 million children aged 6 - 14 years do not attend school, over 3 million children are living on the streets, and over 150 million children are working as bonded labourers and so on. Against this repulsive backdrop, the proposed move of the government to splurge whopping money to the tune of Rs. 2000 crore on caste census just to pander to some vested interests to help them accomplish their narrow political ends is highly insensitive and unwarranted. Since the enumeration of population (i.e. headcount) is a decadal phenomenon, the caste count can be undertaken along with the next headcount. The huge amount of taxpayers’ money in meanwhile can be utilized to assuage the plight of millions of hapless and impoverished people.
Moreover, there are serious doubts on any objective usefulness of this costly drill since in India the same caste bears different name tags in different parts of the Country e.g. a largely trading caste known as “Bania” in and around Haryana is addressed by more than 356 different names all across the India viz. Vani in Maharashtra, Vania in Gujrat, Sood in Himachal Pradesh, Mahajan in Jammu and Kashmir, Marwari in north-east and so forth. Anyhow, the caste census should be broad based enlisting the income, the means of livelihood etc. of the people of different castes so that it may subserve any objective purpose for further demographical and anthropological studies.

POST SCRIPT: Cabinet accorded approval on 9-9 2010 for an independent caste count to be conducted from June to September 2011.

Retirement age and independence of higher judiciary

In his article “Retirement of judges: Raise the age to streamline the higher judiciary” (The Tribune, New Delhi, oped page, August 29, 2010), Justice A.R. Lakshmanan has made a strong case for increasing the retirement age of the judges of the higher judiciary grounded mainly on the premises of increase in the retirement age of counterparts in some quasi-judicial bodies, rise in the longevity or life expectancy of people in India and best use of high-up experienced professionals. However, it also has other dimensions having profound bearing on the independence of higher judiciary in India. The retired judges of the higher judiciary are offered government employment of some kind or other viz. chairmanship, membership of tribunals, statutory commissions, committees and so forth. The lure of such prospective offices and associated perks and pelf, more so in view of the constitutional embargo prohibiting the retired Supreme Court judge and the retired High Court Judge to practice law before any court or authority in India and in the High Court(s) where he held office as a permanent judge respectively, have ample potential to subject some of the serving judges to extraneous considerations and influences in the discharge of their duties and it may undermine the independence of higher judiciary.
In USA, a Judge of the Supreme Court holds office during good behaviour, which means that he can continue to occupy office for life. Although, a judge is at liberty to retire on attaining the age of seventy years and on completing ten years service at the Supreme Court. Even after retirement as distinct from resignation, they can be requested to join the benches to discharge judicial function, whenever need arises. The secured judicial tenure leading virtually up to the last breath of the judge free of the post-retirement anxieties subserves the independence of higher judiciary in USA.
Moreover, the nature and stress of work is same for the judges of the High Courts and the Supreme Court. Present position of difference in age of retirement can inveigle some of the high court judges to curry favour with the Supreme Court’s collegium (entrusted with the function to make appointments and transfers in higher judiciary) to secure an extended tenure of three more years in the Supreme Court.
To plug the gap, the government has introduced the Constitution amendment Bill, 2010 in the Lok Sabha in the last monsoon session to raise the retirement age of High Court Judges from 62 to 65 that is salutary but not adequate. The Bill in the present form is half-baked and only addresses the matter partially. It would be more in the fitness of the things, if in this matter, either the Indian Constitution is appropriately amended on the line of the American Constitution or any how, the age of retirement of both the High Court and Supreme Court Judges be fixed at 70 years in consonance with the present normal life expectancy in India.

Enact law to rein in the rampage of Khap Panchayats (Caste Councils)

THE TRIBUNE, NEW DELHI, SEPTEMBER 4, 2010, P. 12
Deterrent law must to curb “honour killings”
To say that the highhandedness of the khap panchayats in Haryana is a ‘law and order problem’ is too simplistic a viewpoint. It is an ominous social nuisance (editorial “Honour killings: Delay but don’t drop legislation”, Aug 27). Snuffing out young lives by taking refuge in antiquated and unenforceable customs not only renders the much-cherished constitutional freedoms and liberties redundant but is also an anathema to the tenets of the great Indian culture and civilization embedded in the ideals of compassion, tolerance, non-violence and peaceful co-existence.
The glorification of such crimes by the khap panchayats should tantamount to criminal abetment and conspiracy because it provides a supportive ground to the misguided zealots. Medieval practices like social ostracism or expulsion of the couple and their family, diktats pronouncing the legally wedded couple, as brother and sister by the khap panchayats should also be punishable.
The gaps in the law need to be bridged adequately. To curb a crime, both the Union and state legislature should (sic) (read can) enact the law but subject to a rider that in case of any inconsistency in such law, the Central law will prevail. Parliament is obliged to provide a deterrent law to eradicate this social evil. It would be desirable to take the states on board before the enactment of the law.

RAJENDER GOYAL, Bahadurgarh

My wife's take on the Chief Minister's obfuscatory prevarications

The Tribune, New Delhi, August 28, 2010, P. 12
Hooda’s stance on khaps is indefensible
The stance of Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda before the Group of Ministers (GOM) constituted to work out the contours and the contents of the law to curb the menace of “honour killings” reeks of sheer political opportunism (news report, “Hooda’s no to law on honour killings”, Aug 26).
His contention that khap panchayats have no role in the gruesome murder of innocent youngsters is indefensible. The frenzied and sanguinary exhortations of the self-styled leaders of such organisations in full public glare have become an order of the day in Haryana. It not only creates law and order problem but also has the potential to put the social fabric in the state in jeopardy.
Moreover, even a cursory glance across the state of Haryana will bring out that these entities are predominantly caste-centric and mostly operating in those castes which are socially, economically and politically better off. Having already reaped the benefits of political empowerment, they come out in large numbers to participate in the electoral process and constitute a huge vote bank for political parties. Politicians all across the political spectrum (but for exceptions like Shamsher Singh Surjewala) try their utmost to woo them for political gains.
However, it is to be understood by one and all that any molly coddling of and patronage to such anachronistic entities will be disastrous. The posterity will look down upon us.
NEETI GOYAL, Bahadurgarh

Law on Honour Killings

The consistent attempts from some quarters to pass off the flagrant highhandedness and the hooliganism of the khap panchayats just as a law and order problem is too simplistic to tackle an ominous social nuisance. No doubt, that the law making by the Parliament on a matter on the subject of ‘law and order’ requires the consent of the States since the ‘law and order’ is a state subject. However, we dare not to lose sight of the fact that instances of the honour killings are outright crimes involving the gruesome murders of the innocent lovebirds without any justifiable reason or rhyme. To curb a crime, both Union and State Legislatures are competent to enact the law but subject to a rider that in case of any inconsistency in such law, the state law will have to give way to the Central law. The ruthless snuffing out of the sacred lives by taking refuge in the antiquated and unenforceable customs not only renders the much cherished constitutional freedoms and liberties redundant but is also grossly anathema to the tenets of the great Indian culture and civilization embedded into the ideals of the compassion, tolerance, non-violence and peaceful co-existence. The glorification of such crimes, aids in various forms to the culprits by the khap panchayats should tantamount to criminal abetment and conspiracy in the perpetration of such crimes because it provides a supportive ground to the misguided zealots giving rise to the repeated occurrence of such gory incidents. The medieval diktats like social ostracism and/or expulsion of the couple and their family, pronouncing the legally wedded persons as brother and sister by the khap panchayats should also specifically be declared prohibited and punishable. Hence, the khap panchayats can not be absolved of the criminal culpability and gap in the law must be filled adequately. The Indian Parliament is obliged to provide a deterrent law to eradicate this social evil even if any State is striving to stall it for obvious political compulsions. Nevertheless, since the law is to be ultimately administered and enforced by the States, it would be desirable to take the States on the board before the enactment of the law.

MOCK PARLIAMENT

The whole Country steeped in utter disgust and indignation witnessed the clowning of our legislators enacted right with in the precincts of the Indian Parliament on 21st August. The self-fulfilling shenanigans and demagogy of our legislators has reduced the highest seat of the deliberations and the policy-making in a democratic polity into a theatre of mockery and mud slinging. The Founding Fathers of our Constitution had envisioned that persons of immense caliber, intelligence, diligence and integrity, would occupy both houses of the Parliament who will be above the petty considerations of caste, creed, race, region, religion etc. and dedicate themselves in the devout task of nation building. The opposition is assigned the role of a watchdog over the working of government by not letting it to go astray from the goal of good governance in its various nuances through well-considered and constructive advices and interjections. To achieve this end, the treasury bench and the opposition are expected to work in an environment of mutual understanding, trust and respect keeping at the helm the welfare of the public at large. The legislators should shun proclivity to garner some brownie points at all costs even out of human miseries and national tragedies. May the good sense prevail upon our legislators and thus, the majesty and the prestige of the Indian Parliament is restored back to its due place as enshrined in the Constitution of India. Nevertheless, it was a good piece of vignette for all those especially the law students looking for participation in MOCK PARLIAMENT.

PROTECT THE ANIMALS

The proposed move of the government to enact a new law to stop inhuman treatment with animals in place of existing law viz. Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960 is sheerly humane. The penalty of Rs. 50 prescribed under the Act of 1960 for inflicting cruelty against animals is highly ridiculous since even minor traffic violations attract more unsavoury penalties. There should be a blanket ban on animals sacrifice on all occasions across the Country. The vegetarianism should be promoted by way of extensively eulogizing its boons and conversely, the public should be amply acquainted with the banes of the non-vegetarianism. The hapless animals may be saved from the sanguinary appetite of non-vegetarians by imposing some additional unpalatable taxes on the non-vegetarian stuffs. Most of the Indians are religious folks and a point needs to be driven home to each and everybody that violence in any form to the animals is the most conspicuous disservice to the grace of the Almighty.

Whistleblowers Law on the anvil

The Tribune, New Delhi, August 14, 2010, P 12

Law to protect whistleblowers
The decision of the Union Cabinet to clear the decks for the introduction of “The Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making the Disclosure Bill, 2010” in Parliament is laudable (news report, “Bill to protect whistleblowers okayed”, Aug 10). A comprehensive and efficacious law for the protection of whistleblowers has been hanging fire for some time. In the wake of the murder of Sateyendra Kumar Dubey in 2003, the Supreme Court of India was seized of the matter and issued directions to the Central government to do the needful.
Consequently, the government had issued a resolution in 2004 on public interest disclosures and protection of informers wherein the government authorised the Central Vigilance Commission to receive written complaints for disclosure on any allegation of corruption or misuse of office and recommend appropriate action.
In 2006, the government introduced The Whistleblowers (Protection In Public Interest Disclosures) Bill, 2006, in the Rajya Sabha. Sadly, thereafter, the Bill went into oblivion. In August 2009, the CBI in its 17th Biennial Conference of Heads of States Anti-Corruption Bureau exhorted Parliament to enact the Whistle Blower Act as recommended by the U.N. Convention against corruption and directed by the Supreme Court of India.
The Public Interest Disclosure and Protection to Persons Making the Disclosure Bill, 2010, envisages an exceedingly vital role for the CVC to protect the interests of the whistleblowers. The grievances of the RTI activists regarding the failure of the CVC to protect the interests of whistleblowers, particularly the failure to shield their identity, have amply been taken care of in the proposed Bill by way of providing for stringent punishment for the violators.
The murder of RTI activist Amit Jethwa in Gujarat again shows that social crusaders are on a sticky wicket and need to be provided an adequate and potent legal framework.
RAJENDER GOYAL, Bahadurgarh

Provide armour to the Whistleblowers

Hindustan Times, Delhi, August 9, 2010, P. 10

Defend the defenceless
With reference to the report "Law to protect whistleblowers on cabinet table" (August 5), the government introduced the Whistleblowers (Protection in Public Interest Disclosures) Bill, in 2006 to provide protection to people who bring to light specific instances of illegality, criminality and corruption in any public or private enterprise. The murder of Right To Information (RTI) activist Amit Jethwa in Gujarat makes it imperative for the bill to be made into a law.The grievances of RTI activists regarding the failures of the Central Vigilance Commission also needs to be looked into.
Rajender Goyal