- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- 'You Became Claimant, Prosecutor &...
'You Became Claimant, Prosecutor & Judge' : Supreme Court To UP Govt On Recovery Against Congress Over UPSRTC Dues
Gyanvi Khanna
20 Aug 2024 6:19 PM IST
The Supreme Court today (on August 20) extended the stay granted from the recovery of Rs 2.66 crores from the Uttar Pradesh Congress Committee (UPCC) towards the dues to the Uttar Pradesh State Transport Corporation (UPSRTC). Pertinently, the dues were for using the buses and taxis of the UPSRTC for its political purposes between 1981-89, the period during which the Congress party was...
The Supreme Court today (on August 20) extended the stay granted from the recovery of Rs 2.66 crores from the Uttar Pradesh Congress Committee (UPCC) towards the dues to the Uttar Pradesh State Transport Corporation (UPSRTC). Pertinently, the dues were for using the buses and taxis of the UPSRTC for its political purposes between 1981-89, the period during which the Congress party was in power in the State.
During the hearing, the bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan told the counsel appearing for the UP that the state itself determined the dues acting as the "claimant, prosecutor and the judge."
To recall, previously, the Court had stayed this recovery subject to the condition of the UPCC depositing Rs 1 crore within four week. While issuing notice on the UPCC's Special Leave Petition, the Bench had also said that the Court would explore the possibility of appointing an arbitrator to determine and ascertain the actual liability of the petitioner.
The Court was hearing a special leave petition filed by the UPCC against the judgment delivered by the Allahabad High Court in October last year directing the party to clear the UPSRTC dues with interest at the rate of 5% from the due date within three months.
The hearing was ultimately adjourned as Senior Advocate Garima Prasad, Additional Advocate General of UP, was busy with a part-heard matter. Responding to the queries of the Bench, the counsel representing the State submitted that genuine efforts have been made for arbitration but it was very hard to go back in time and get the evidence.
At this Justice Kant said, “But then (if) you cannot go into the (report), how can you impose the levy on them? How can you order the recovery? You have become the claimant, the prosecutor and the judge. You yourself has determined this amount…”
However, the Court indicated that it would either quash everything and UPCC may have to refund or it will close the matter with 1 crore. “It is a reverse situation. Normally, political parties take donation, here political party will donate to a corporation.,” the Court said.
Ultimately, the Court listed the matter a non-miscellaneous day and marked that the stay would continue. Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid appeared for the Congress party.
The High Court bench comprising Justice Vivek Chaudhary and Justice Manish Kumar passed the judgment noting that the UPCC exercised its dominant position and utilized public property for its political purposes. Essentially, UPSRTC's stance before the High Court was that between the years 1981 and 1989, vehicles like buses, taxis, etc., were provided to the UPCC on the directions of the then Chief Minister and Minister concerned, who all belonged to the petitioner party. The bills were regularly raised and were liable to be paid.
In its order, the bench noted that the State had initiated recovery proceedings against Congress in 1998 under the UP Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1972; however, the recovery proceedings stayed in November 1998, and the case remained pending for the past 25 years, without payment of bills.
Further, the High Court said that even though the amount is not recoverable under the provisions of the Act of 1972, since the amount has not been paid for 25 years, the Court directed the UPCC to pay UPSRTC the entire due of Rs.266 Lakhs along with an interest of 5% from the date it is due within a period of three months.
Case Title: UP Congress Committee (I) Vs State of UP., SLP(C) No. 828/2024
