Return
to Story Page
To print: Select File and then Print from your
browser's menu
EXPRESS NEWS SERVICE
CHANDIGARH, July 28: After finding no merit in the plea of the Chandigarh Administration seeking more time for implementation of the HC directives on traffic management, enabling it to file a special leave petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday dismissed the same.
The contentious issue of granting exemption to Sikh women from wearing helmets was, however, adjourned to August 3, after the court directed to place on record any notifications in this regard. Earlier, holding that even though the Administration had the right to move the Supreme Court against the orders of the High Court, Justice Swatanter Kumar said the plea of the Administration for more time was not in larger public interest and also did not contain reasons as to justify the grant of extension in implementing the HC orders.
Justice Swatanter Kumar was one of the judges in the division bench of the court which had issued the directions with regard to traffic management in UT, Punjab and CHANDIGARH, July 28: After finding no merit in the plea of the Chandigarh Administration seeking more time for implementation of the HC directives on traffic management, enabling it to file a special leave petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday dismissed the same.
The contentious issue of granting exemption to Sikh women from wearing helmets was, however, adjourned to August 3, after the court directed to place on record any notifications in this regard. Earlier, holding that even though the Administration had the right to move the Supreme Court against the orders of the High Court, Justice Swatanter Kumar said the plea of the Administration for more time was not in larger public interest and also did not contain reasons as to justify the grant of extension in implementing the HC orders.
Justice Swatanter Kumar was one of the judges in the division bench of the court which had issued the directions with regard to traffic management in UT, Punjab andHaryana.
``Since all the states concerned had put in a lot of effort and that many of the directives had already been implemented, in case the directives were now stayed it would be nothing but a reversal of the efforts put in,'' the judge observed, adding that ``the grant of time at this stage would cause injustice to all concerned.''
The court also observed that the two applications filed by the Administration were contradictory as one of them sought time for filing of SLP and the other prayed for extension of time for implementing the orders.During the arguments in the case, the judge observed that ``strictly speaking, contempt had already been committed by the officers concerned as the time for implementation of the HC judgment had already expired.''
The court substantiated the rejection of UT's plea by observing that ``the HC orders were not pronounced without the participation of any of the states and that it had taken at least three years for the court to finalise the directions, which wereprimarily part of the recommendations of the high-powered committee constituted by it and other committees, and thus the same should not be undone.''
The Chandigarh Adminisration had sought 90 days' time for the implementation of HC directives. Meanwhile, as regards the review petitions filed by the SGPC and Gurcharan Singh Tohra, both seeking exemption for Sikh women from wearing helmets, the court directed the respective states to file a reply within four days.
Copyright © 1998 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
------------------------------------------------------------
This story was printed from Net Express located at http://www.expressindia.com. Net Express provides a portal to India, with news from The Indian Express and The Financial Express along with sites on travel and tourism, the entertainment industry, the power sector, the environment and much more.
------------------------------------------------------------