Allahabad HC Asks UP Govt To File Response In Plea Against Ordinance For Recovery Of Damages [Read Order]
In a challenge to its latest ordinance enabling recovery of damages to property, the Allahabad High Court has asked the UP state government to file its reply in the matter within a week. "Having considered the arguments advanced and also of the facts and grounds referred in the petition for writ, we consider it appropriate to have a counter affidavit to have adequate response by the...
In a challenge to its latest ordinance enabling recovery of damages to property, the Allahabad High Court has asked the UP state government to file its reply in the matter within a week.
"Having considered the arguments advanced and also of the facts and grounds referred in the petition for writ, we consider it appropriate to have a counter affidavit to have adequate response by the State of Uttar Pradesh. The State of Uttar Pradesh thus is directed to file a counter to the petition on or before 25th March, 2020. A copy of the counter affidavit shall also be supplied to counsel for the petitioner while submitting the same in Court," the bench comprised by Chief Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Samit Gopal said.
On Tuesday, Advocate Shashank Shri Tripathi had moved the high court challenging the vires of the Uttar Pradesh Recovery of Damages to Public and Private Properties Act 2020.
It was stated that the Ordinance is a "mischief played on the Constitution".
Notably, the ordinance was promulgated on March 15, after the Allahabad HC came down on the UP administration for erecting banners in public places displaying the names, photographs and addresses of persons accused of committing violence during anti-CAA protests.
The UP government challenged the order in the Supreme Court by filing SLP. On March 12, a vacation bench comprising Justices U U Lalit and Aniruddha Bose referred the matter to a larger bench to be heard this week, after refusing to stay the High Court order and orally remarking that the State's action had no support of law.
According to the petitioner, the Ordinance is an attempt to give post-facto validity to the recovery notices issued by adjudicating authorities to anti-CAA protesters.
The Petitioner has submitted that the Ordinance is inconsistent with the provisions of Part-III of the Constitution of India. It is stated that in light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Re: Destruction of Public & Private Properties v. State of A.P. and Others, (2009) (5) SCC 212, a person is having a fundamental right to privacy. Such valuable right shall be seriously infringed by operation of the Ordinance of 2020.
It is also argued that Article 323B of the Constitution does not contemplate the constitution of Claims Tribunals. Hence, the petitioner states that the Claims Tribunal as created by the Ordinance is not "sanctioned by the Constitution".
The petition thus seeks to declare the Ordinance ultra-vires and to stay its operation, as an interim measure.
Case Details:
Case Title: Shashank Shri Tripathi v. State of UP & Ors.
Case No.: PIL No. 547/2020
Quorum: Chief Justice Govind Mathur and Justice Samit Gopal
Read Order