[It's truly unfortunate that the President gave his nod to the
repromulgation of the Ordinance merely a fortnight before the
parliament resumes its session without bothering to ask what was the
extraordinary urgency?

And now this Supreme Court bench allows four week's time to the
government, so that it does not have to deal with the fundamental
issue involved as regards repromulgation of an ordinance.]

http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31804&articlexml=SC-seeks-Centres-reply-on-land-ordinance-validity-14042015012003

Apr 14 2015 : The Times of India (Mumbai)
SC seeks Centre's reply on land ordinance validity
Dhananjay Mahapatra
New Delhi

We Hope PIL Becomes Infructuous Soon: Court

The Supreme Court on Monday sought the Centre's response in four weeks
to a PIL challenging the validity of the land acquisi ion ordinance
but hoped that he Narendra Modi government would revert to legisla ive
process soon and render he PIL "infructuous".
Three Delhi-based NGOs have challenged the Centre's have challenged
the Centre's decision to re-promulgate the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Ac quisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
(Amendment Ordinance on April 3 bypass ng Parliament.

A bench of Justices J S Khehar and S A Bobde issued notice to the
Centre after se nior advocate Indira Jaising argued that
re-promulgation of the ordinance was a serious nfraction of the
legislative scheme, which stood at the core of democratic govern ance.
When the bench gave our weeks to the Centre to re spond, Jaising said
this could render the PIL infructuous.

The bench said, "We may hope that it soon becomes in ructuous." The
PIL could be come void if the governmen n the coming four weeks in
roduces the bill, which was passed in Lok Sabha on March 10.
Introduction of the bill in Rajya Sabha would mean the ordinance would
lose its life as the legislative process com mences. The land
acquisition law would get amended only if RS passes the bill followed
by the President's assent to it. The land acquisition Act was passed
by Parliament on Sep tember 27, 2013, and the UPA government had
notified it on January 1, 2014.

A week after the winter ses sion of Parliament ended on December 23,
last year, the NDA promulgated the ordi nance, which brought in cer
tain amendments to the land acquisition law. An ordinance having a
life span of six months, has to be laid before Parliament within six
weeks of the session commencing. The budget session of Parliament
started on February 28. This means, the ordinance would have expired
on April 5 if it did not get Parliament approval. After Lok Sabha
passed the bill, the government knew it did not have the numbers in
Rajya Sabha and hence prorogued it to enable re-promulgation of the
ordinance, the petitioners said through advocate Devadatt Kamat and
Gautam Talukdar.

"Contrary to all cannons of constitutional morality , the President on
the advice of the council of ministers re-promulgated the land
acquisition ordinance. The government's decision was driven by the
fact that the 2015 land acquisition amendment bill was sure to fall
through in Rajya Sabha.Ordinance cannot be a substitute for
legislative process for enacting laws. The government had not even
indicated the extraordinary situation necessitating re-promulgation of
the ordinance," the petitioners said.

-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to