New Delhi: The Supreme Court has adjourned the hearing to July 23 on a petition calling the recovery of damages from anti-CAA protesters illegal in Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner says that the administration had sent notices to the people without any legal basis. In response, the UP government told today that a law has been made in this regard. On this, the court indicated that the matter would be closed in the next hearing.
In January last year, a petitioner named Parvez Arif Titu had claimed in the Supreme Court that notices for damages were being sent to harass minorities in UP. The petitioner said that according to the earlier judgment of the Supreme Court, the order for assessment and compensation of damages in such cases should have come from the High Court or any judicial body. But in UP, the district administration has sent notices to the people. These notices are also illegal because there is no law regarding this in the state.
In the hearing held last year, the Supreme Court had rightly called recovery from those who vandalized public property. But the state government was asked to stand on the legal basis behind the recovery notices sent to the people. Today, after about one and a half years, this issue happened. A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah was informed on behalf of the petitioner that their lead counsel Nilofar Khan was not in a position to appear due to personal reasons. Therefore the hearing should be postponed.
On this, the judges wanted to know who has appeared for the UP government. State’s Additional Advocate General Garima Prasad told the bench that necessary legislation has been made on this matter. The law has been notified. Claims tribunals have also been formed on its basis. The bench asked him to submit this information kept orally in the form of written affidavit. The hearing will be held on July 23.
On behalf of the petitioner, it was requested to keep the date of hearing after 1 month. To this the judges said that there is no need for it. He has read the entire file of the case. Even if the lawyer Nilofar is not available, it will not matter. After the state’s affidavit comes, the matter will be closed in the next hearing.