: Justice N. Kirubakaran of the Madras High Court on Thursday cautioned against giving a political colour to judges when they deal with politically sensitive cases.
“Whenever a judge passes an order in a dispute, which has political interests, depending on whose favour the judgement is, the judge is given a political colour, though the decision is made on merits of the case,” he observed, while hearing a petition filed by the DMK seeking proper reservation for members of the Scheduled Tribe in the upcoming local body elections as mandated by the Constitution.
When the plea came up for hearing, explaining how judges are given “political colour” while deciding such petitions, Justice Kirubakaran said, “I just wanted to express my concern.”
The opposition party had also assailed the “hurried” manner in which the election was announced, and the process of receiving the nominations from the very next day of the notification of the schedule of elections by the State Election Commission.
Denying the allegation, the Advocate General submitted that even in 2006, when the DMK was in power, elections to local bodies were notified on September 19, and the nomination process was started on September 20.
“Even in 2011, the notification was issued on September 21, and receiving (of) nomination was started from the very next day. This is a pattern followed by all the ruling governments,” he said.
Recording the submission, the judge said, “I was of the opinion that the government was in a rush; now the submissions gives a different picture.”
The judge then questioned the petitioner, “as to what steps the party has taken so far, being a responsible opposition, for the conduct of fair and free election, apart from approaching this court in the last minute.”
To this, senior counsel for the petitioner said, “We have given notice to the State Election Commission on the issue before six months. And whenever we raise such issues in the Assembly, we are thrown out.”
Not convinced by the reply the judge said, “The present government is following the precedent that is already set.”
When the petitioner’s counsel contended that the State Election Commission should have asked the government authorities to conduct the elections in a fair manner providing a level playing field for all the parties, the judge said, “The petitioner’s party was also in power. They know what powers the State Election Commission has, particularly against the State government.”
Meanwhile, the senior counsel for the State Election Commission submitted that so far over 42,000 nominations have been received from aspiring candidates, but no one has complained.
Recording all the submissions, the judge said that he would most likely pass orders by Friday, as the last date for receiving nomination ends on Monday.
The court may pronounce orders on DMK’s plea on ‘proper’ reservation for ST candidates today
