Thread by @barandbench

#SupremeCourt to hear a plea seeking quashing of the recovery notices issued by the Uttar Pradesh administration to recover the damage caused to public properties in connection with protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act in the state #antiCAAProtests

During the last hearing, the bench observed that the Uttar Pradesh government has acted like a "complainant, adjudicator and prosecutor" by itself in conducting the proceedings to attach the properties of the accused #SupremeCourt

UP AAG: We have honoured the courts observations. All showcause notices have been withdrawn. District magistrates were also informed. All 275 files were also sent to the claims tribunal

Justice Surya Kant: We appreciate the stand

UP AAG: Please grant liberty to issue the process under the new act. State also says that the intent of the judgment of the top court has been fulfilled. Ever since the act came into force no violent incidents or public property damage took place

SC: the idea of our judgment was that there should be accountability when public property is damaged. But a judicial mind has to oversee it and there is application of judicial mind

Adv Nilofer Khan: Please note that the new notices can be challenged in court of law or challenge the constitutionality of the legislation.

SC: That is not the subject matter before us.

SC: State of UP informs that through govt orders on Feb 14 and 15 the notices have been withdrawn. In view of UP Recovery Of Damage to public and private property act 2020 it has been stated that state govt will refer to the claims tribunal

SC: In view of the statement nothing would survive.

AAG: There may be issues with limitation with ref to the claims tribunal application. We need some direction to this effect.

SC: The state as clarified is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law that is the State legislation of 2020. The plea under Article 32 stands disposed off.
#SupremeCourt

AAG: please direct the tribunal to dispose of pleas in a definite period of time.

SC: Sorry, we will stick to the narrow contour of the case before us. Please move the tribunal.

SC: Ms Prasad if damages have been recovered that has to be paid back

AAG: Then the message that will go is.... Please maintain status quo

Khan: rickshaw pullers ,fruit sellers had to sell their carts etc to pay the damages.

SC: There shall be a refund of the damages recovered in the meantime. However it will be subject to the decision of the claims tribunal.

AAG: Please maintain status quo

Justice Kant: tomorrow tribunal may increase or decrease damages

AAG: Certain properties have been taken into custody by the state already

SC: But that is against a lawful order. We cannot go against law you see

AAG: Model Code of Conduct is there and we are unable to move any difficulties

SC: MCC does not stop you from following law !

SC: when you implement a judgment of the Supreme Court how does model code of conduct stop you

AAG: if the property has been seized. Then how can it be released now

SC: if an attachment has been done against the law and if such orders have been recalled how can attachment go on

SC: you can move the tribunal. We cannot act against the law.

Khan: if some person challenges the constitutionality of the 2020 act then the tribunal will not proceed saying case is pending.

SC: We are not entering the arena

AAG: Please don't direct refund lordship. State has come earnestly before this court

SC: On refund, if it's adjustment of taxes etc then it's different. This is fine levied on citizens. How much fine do you recover ?

AAG: It's worth crores. Please don't direct refund.

SC: I think the hearing is over..

Justice Surya Kant: we have no doubt on powers and responsibility of the state. I am sure when tribunal holds so, you can again issue notices

Justice Chandrachud: our order will not come in you way

AAG: The message that will go to the public My Lord..

SC: Please establish the case before the tribunal.

AAG: The message that will go is the entire process was illegal

SC: We will clarify that refund is ordered since notices have been withdrawn by the state. All consequences of withdrawal has to follow

AAG: Please have faith in state govt

SC: There are cases where we don't grant refund like unjust enrichment of business house. Here the burden has been shifted to the public. We have to follow our very own yardstick of constitutional jurisprudence.

AAG: Lordship you are looking at small vendors etc. But that is not the case. The entire law will be frustrated if refund is ordered.

SC: No no law will not be frustrated. You have got good people to the tribunal. I am sure they will soon pass orders

All deference against evasion of law has to be within four corners of law and it cannot lie outside the four corners of the law Ms Prasad. Article 142 entrusts this duty on us. We have to act in accordance with the law: Justice Chandrachud

AAG: the message that will go is..

SC: Next time please.

#SupremeCourt #AntiCAAProtests