“Unnecessary Act Of Haste”: Madras High Court Dismisses Murasoli Trust's Plea Against Inquiry By National Commission For Scheduled Caste

While dismissing a petition filed by Murasoli Trust challenging a notice issued by the National Commission for Scheduled Caste, the Madras High Court called the trust's action unnecessary and uncalled for as the commission was acting within its jurisdiction. “But this court is of the opinion that on receipt of the notice itself, to approach this Constitutional Court for an order to restrain the NCSC to proceed with the natural course of inquiry, is an unnecessary act of haste and is uncalled for. All the more, it is not a case of complete lack of jurisdiction or where an inquiry is inconsistent with the principles of natural justice,” the court said. Justice SM Subramaniam noted that the National Commission for Scheduled Caste was a constitutional body for the benefit of the socially disadvantaged group in the country. The court added that NCSC has all the powers of a civil court including the powers to summon, receiving evidence, requisitioning public records, issue commissions, and other powers stipulated under the Constitution. Thus, the court observed that the commission had only acted within its power when it received a complaint about the deprivation of the legal right of the Scheduled caste members. “The power to inquire under Article 338 of the Constitution is encompassed within the scope of NCSC. It is to be noted that the NCSC has not issued any direction or order in this matter. It has only issued notice calling for inquiry. There is no bar on the NCSC to issue a notice when it has received a specific complaint with respect to deprivation of the legal rights of the Scheduled Caste members. When there has been a violation of any legal right or constitutional safeguards of the Scheduled Caste Community, the NCSC is entitled to inquire into the allegations,” the court said. Background One Dr Srinivasan had registered a complaint with the NCSC stating that the Murasoli Trust was in the occupation of a Panchami land which was assigned to the Scheduled Caste persons and was illegally transferred. The Trust argued that the Commission did not have power to declare the title of an immovable property. It was also argued that “land”, being a matter on the State List, the NCSC had no jurisdiction. It was also submitted that the complaint was given to gain political mileage as the complainant belonged to a different political party. The Additional Solicitor General, however, argued that the NCSC is empowered to conduct an inquiry and ascertain the character of a land and pass orders if it is found that the a fraud or abuse of power has been conducted to transfer the Panchami land to other persons. It was also submitted that the entries made in the Patta, showing the land as a patta land, were not conclusive evidence. Regarding political vendetta, it was submitted that even if a political party member had given a complaint, the NSCS had a duty to enquire. The court agreed with this submission and observed that even though “Land” was ametter falling within the State List, the NCSC was empowered to deal with such matters if it dealt with the rights of the Scheduled caste members. “The NCSC is empowered to investigate and monitor all matters, including land matters, if such lands are Panchami lands, assigned in favour of the Scheduled Caste Community people. The language employed in Article 338(5)(a) of the Constitution, is to investigate and monitor all matters relating to the safeguards provided for the Scheduled Castes. Therefore, it is not as if the NCSC has no jurisdiction to inquire into the land matters,” the court said. Concerning political vendetta, the court noted that when pleas were filed by members of political parties, it was a common practice to raise the question of malafides. However, the court added that when the larger interest of public was affected, the court cannot attribute ma;afideness to political parties agitating such cause. The court added that when there was when actual violation of rights had taken place, the court could not dismiss the plea on the ground of malafideness or political vendetta. However, considering that the notice was issued by the commission directing the Trust to appear before the then Vice-Chairman, Dr L Murugan who has since been appointed a minister, the court deemed it fit to direct the NCSC to issue a fresh notice to the parties. Thus, the court directed the NCSC to proceed with the inquiry by affording opportunity to all parties and pass appropriate orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.P.Wilson Senior Counsel For M/s.P.Wilson Associates Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan Additional Solicitor General of India For Mr.S.Diwakar Senior Panel Counsel, Mr.S.Ravi Senior Counsel For Mr.K.Ramanamoorthy, Mr.B.Rabu Manohar Senior Panel Counsel, Mr.R.Ramanlal Additional Advocate General IV For Mr.G.Krishna Raja Additional Government Pleader ...

“Unnecessary Act Of Haste”: Madras High Court Dismisses Murasoli Trust's Plea Against Inquiry By National Commission For Scheduled Caste

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

“Unnecessary Act Of Haste”: Madras High Court Dismisses Murasoli Trust's Plea Against Inquiry By National Commission For Scheduled Caste

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasana Sajeev

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers