On Haryana advocacy, SC seeks responses from 43 farmer organizations
The Supreme Court on Monday asked for responses from 43 farmer organizations and their leaders, including Rakesh Tikait, Darshan Pal and Gurnam Singh Chaduni who are leading protests on Delhi’s borders against agricultural laws, at the plea of the government of the Haryana alleging that they had not participated in talks with her panel to resolve the impasse over the road blockade here.
Haryana filed the request in the PIL filed by Monicca Agrawaal, a resident of Noida, who called for the blockade to be lifted, claiming that previously it took 20 minutes to reach Delhi and now it takes over two hours and locals of the region are facing difficulties due to protests at the UP gate on the Delhi border.
“Give an opinion, Dasti (via Messenger) too,” said a bench consisting of Judges SK Kaul and MM Sundresh while taking note of the plea.
“Mr. Mehta (Solicitor General Tushar Mehta), you made about 43 people as parties. How are you going to serve them, ”the bench asked.
Mehta said the farm leaders are necessary parties to the case and that he will ensure they are served notice and has requested a plea hearing on Friday, October 8. Mehta, representing the state, said Haryana had set up a panel to hold talks with protesting farm leaders who refused to participate in talks intended to resolve the issue. “That a notice be issued so that they do not say that they had no reason to come,” he submitted.
The bench has now posted the case for a new hearing on October 20.
Haryana, in his plea, said the state-level panel was set up by him on September 15, 2021 to hold talks with farmers’ organizations, but they declined to show up for talks on the 19th. September. border is organized by Sanyukt Kisan Morcha which is an organ of several Kisan unions and the name of the parties for the implementation mentioned above are the officials / employees of various Kisan unions, so are the necessary party to solve the problem ”, said the plea. The bench had wondered at a previous hearing saying that how the freeways could be blocked perpetually.
“Repairing problems can be done through a judicial forum, agitation or parliamentary debates. But how to block the highways and it happens perpetually. Where does it end, ”he asked.
He also asked the Center what the government was doing in this area. The Center had said it had called a meeting with the protesting farmers and the details were mentioned in the affidavit.
Mehta said the court should allow the petitioner to make the farmers’ union a party to the petition, so that they do not later say that they were not parties to the case.
The bench had told Mehta that it is he who will have to present a request to make the party the representative of the farmers as a petitioner, an individual may not know who their leaders are.
On August 23, the highest court said central and neighboring Delhi states would have to find a solution to the roadblocks at the borders of the nation’s capital due to protests by farmers.
He had explained to the Center why the government could not find a solution to this problem as if the farmers had the right to protest but at the designated places and due to the protests the in and out flow of the traffic cannot be disrupted.
The trial court said it would also impact the collection of tolls, as vehicles will not be able to pass due to blockages.
He then ordered: “The solution is in the hands of the Indian Union and the governments of the states concerned. They must coordinate to find a solution so that when a demonstration takes place, the roads are not blocked and traffic is not disrupted to cause inconvenience to ordinary people ”.