The petitioner, wine contractor Satya Pal, had earlier alleged the "clubbing" of vends "only to give undue benefit to respondent number four (Maan Singh Garcha and Company) and to oust him and other bidders...at the instance of Punjab chief minister". "The main partner of respondent number four," the petitioner had added, "happens to be the brother of Akali Dal MLA Jagdish Singh Garcha, who is very close to the chief minister".

Maintaining the auction to be "against the directions issued by the Court earlier in a similar writ petition, he had stated that "the action of the respondents was also against the interest of state revenue".

Today, pronouncing the orders in an open court, Justice J.L. Gupta and Justice N.K. Agrawal directed the holding of the auctions as per schedule. The bench also permitted the petitioners to "take a person with a video camera and record the proceedings". The Judges observed: "These auctions shall not be confirmed by the Excise and Taxation Commissioner till March 22, 1999. However, this shall not preclude the competent authority from accepting 10 per cent of the bid money by way of deposit at the fall of the hammer in the auctions."

Issuing notice of motion to the State of Punjab and other respondents for March 22, the bench also directed the filing of reply by March 19. Claiming certain irregularities had been committed during the action of the vends, petitioner's counsel Mohan Jain had earlier alleged the operating of the installed cameras "in such a way that the correct position was not recorded". Seeking the appointment of an observer, he had also expressed apprehensions regarding the taking place of "certain malpractices" during the subsequent auctions.

Consider parole for 38, Punjab told
Chandigarh: Allowing a writ petition, Justice R.L. Anand of the Punjab and Haryana High Court today directed the Punjab government to consider the case of 38 petitioners, convicted under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, for parole.

Pronouncing the orders, Justice Anand held that the government would consider their case "according to law as contained in the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 and its Rules by treating that such convicts are entitled to the benefit of parole furlough as per the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the said Act."

Referring to the provisions of the Act, Justice Anand observed: "It was enacted with a purpose and the purpose as I understand is very useful to change the outlook of a criminal so as to make him a useful member of society. If he is not allowed to do so, it can have a very bad effect on his attitude towards society."

"The stress," Justice Anand held, "these days is to hate the crime and not the criminal, rather to give him all the possible avenues to bring him on the path which may lead to peace in society and to get rid of a criminal. One of the ways to do it is to allow him to come out of the cold walls of the jail and to associate with the members of his family so as to carry out the obligations of a social human being, so as to bring tranquility, happiness and prosperity in the society." Earlier, in their petition, Kashmir Singh and 37 others had sought directions to the State of Punjab to allow parole to the prisoners convicted and sentenced under the NDPS Act.