Shambhu Border Blockade | Supreme Court To Constitute Committee To Negotiate With Protesting Farmers Within One Week

To this effect, the Bench of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and Ujjal Bhuyan suggested the States of Punjab and Haryana to submit proposed issues that will be the subject matter of reference for the Committee. The prescribed timeline for the same is three days. In the order, the Court also clarified that the reference to the committee will be a wider mandate so that the issues which are time and again causing law and order problems can be amicably resolved in a fair and just manner.

Further, the representatives of the States are required to continue their meetings with the farmers and shall apprise the outcome of the same on the next date of hearing. Lastly, the Court also granted liberty to the State of Punjab to suggest more names for the composition of the committee, within three days.

The Court was hearing Haryana's plea against Punjab and Haryana High Court's direction to unblock the Shambhu Border between the States of Punjab and Haryana. The border was closed in February this year due to farmers' protests, raising demands such as a statutory guarantee for the Minimum Support Price for crops.

Previously, both the states had submitted a list of names of persons to the Supreme Court who could be included in the panel proposed to be formed by the Court to hold negotiations with the protesters and the government.

Apart from this, the Court had also directed the Director Generals of Police of Punjab and Haryana, along with the Senior Superintendent of Police of Patiala and Ambala and Deputy Commissioners of both districts to hold a meeting within one week to lay down the modalities for partial opening of the Highway. This was for some essential purposes including for ambulances, senior citizens, women, students, and any commuters of the nearby area.

During today's proceedings, Punjab Advocate General Gurminder Singh submitted that this meeting was conducted on August 19. He said that after deliberations, farmer's unions were called and the officials met them. When Justice Kant asked him about the progress, Singh replied that they did not have issues with the opening of the highway. However, he flagged that the unions are still resolved to agitate.

"We have told them that you want to, do it in a legal manner. You can proceed, if you want, on vehicles which are permissible. To that, they have taken time in saying that these trolleys, in prolonged agitations, are the only respite that they have in harsh weather conditions. So, that we will deliberate and get back on.," he submitted.

Following this, Justice Kant said that while the composition of the Committee and issues to be resolved are almost done, the Court is making some inquiries. The Court also requested the State to give assurance to the farmers that not only the States but also the Court is inclined to create a forum that can reach out and identify their grievances.

"Meanwhile, we will formally constitute in three-four days....We have done our homework but we want you also to identify the issues that you think the committee should look into.," Court added.

When Haryana AAG said that even in the meeting, the farmers were insisting that they would go to Delhi with tractors and trolleys, Justice Kant responded: "That we will take as their innocuous (version) because they think that if we go like this then probably they will have an effective voice. In a democratic set-up, these kinds of impressions (are there). We will not any offence..."

The Bench asked the State to continue to persuade the farmers to remove tractors and trolleys and if need be, then the issues can informally be discussed with them. It was also made clear that the committee would have some kind of power or authority to make recommendations which will have to be looked into by the State governments and Union.

When AG suggested that one more meeting be held before the next date of hearing to crystalise the issues. The Court conceded and said that in that case matter would be taken up on September 2.

Background

To recall, the impugned order directed the Haryana government to unblock Shambhu border, which was closed in February this year to prevent the movement of protesting farmers from Punjab to Haryana. Against this order, the State approached the top Court.

Previously, the Court had asked the States of Haryana and Punjab to suggest the names of neutral persons who could be included in a committee to negotiate with the protesting farmers. Besides this, the Bench had also emphasized the need to inspire confidence in the farmers.

The Court also agreed to the suggestion that the border needs to be opened, at least for access to emergent services across the states. Justice Kant orally said that an ambulance carrying patients or a car carrying senior citizens cannot be prevented.

To this effect, the Bench suggested that in such emergent cases, the police personnel deployed on both sides (Haryana and Punjab) can coordinate amongst themselves so that the vehicles are allowed to pass.

Case Details: THE STATE OF HARYANA VS. UDAY PRATAP SINGH., DIARY NO. - 30656/2024