LexM.C. MEHTA versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 1177 M. C. MEHTA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4677 of 1985) In RE : SEALING ISSUE (Report Nos. 129 and 131 submitted by Monitoring Committee) NOVEMBER 22, 2018 [MADAN B. LOKUR, S. ABDUL NAZEER AND DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.] Urban Development: Sealing of unauthorized/illegal dairy – By Milch Tax Inspector, on the direction of Director (Veterinary Services) of East Delhi Municipal Corporation (EDMC) – Seal broken by a Member of Parliament (MP) – FIR – Premises re-sealed – Monitoring Committee (appointed by Supreme Court) submitted its Report No. 129 before Supreme Court stating the above facts – Notice issued to the MP – In the meantime Monitoring Committee filed Report No. 131 stating that an article in a leading national daily mentioned that soon after hearing on 3rd October, 2018, the MP alleged that the Monitoring Committee was running a sealing racket in connivance with corrupt officers – Held: Monitoring Committee had no role to play in the matter of sealing the premises in question – However, the MP did take law into his own hands by breaking the seal – It is left to the better judgment of the political party, to which he belongs, to take action against him – Allegations made by the MP against the Monitoring Committee shows his total lack of respect for any rule of law – However, the Court does not intend to proceed against the MP for the reckless statement – Therefore, the proceedings against the MP and the Reports of the Monitoring Committee are closed. Closing the Reports of the Monitoring Committee, the Court HELD: 1. The Monitoring Committee had no role to play in the matter of sealing the premises which was in violation of the provisions of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. The sealing and de-sealing of the premises had nothing to do with the Monitoring Committee which was not consulted in the matter and no direction had been given by the Monitoring Committee [2018] 13 S.C.R. 1177 1177 A B C D E F G H 1178 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 13 S.C.R. to seal the premises. The sealing of the premises was an independent act carried out by the Veterinary Services Department of the EDMC and had no concern with the Monitoring Committee. [Paras 9 and 10][1181-C-E] 2.1 Notwithstanding this, there is no doubt that the Member of Parliament did take the law into his own hands and broke the seal or tampered with it. Shri Manoj Tiwari is an elected MP and hopefully a responsible citizen of Delhi. Instead of pacifying the mob and requiring the mob to act in accordance with law, Shri Manoj Tiwari acted irresponsibly by taking the law into his own hands. The consequence of such a behaviour can be devastating in a given situation. It is left to the better judgment of the political party, to which he belongs, to take action against the MP, if so advised. [Paras 11, 12 and 13][1181-E-G; 1182-B] 2.2 The misplaced bravado of the MP and his chest thumping immediately after the hearing on 3rd October, 2018 and making serious but frivolous allegations against the Monitoring Committee appointed by this Court is a clear indication of how low he can stoop, and displays his total lack of respect for any rule of law. It seems that he is, in a sense, a rebel without a cause. The court does not intend to proceed against him for the reckless statement attributed to him as publicized by the Media Department of the political party. Pumping for apparently misplaced political propaganda has no place in our courts; this unhealthy practice needs to be strongly deprecated. The proceedings against the MP are closed. Report Nos. 129 and 131 are also closed. [Paras 15 and 16][1182-D-G] M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (2006) 3 SCC 399 : [2006] 2 SCR 264 – referred to. Case Law Reference [2006] 2 SCR 264 referred to Para 1 CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4677 of 1985 Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India Ranjit Kumar, Sr. Advocate (A.C.) A. D. N. Rao, (A.C.) Ms. Anitha Shenoy, (A.C.) Advs. A B C D E F G H 1179 Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv., Ajay Kr. Singh, Neeraj, Satyendra Kr. Srivastav, Ramesh Tiwari, Vinay Kumar, Atulesh Kumar, R. Bala, Sachin Sharma, Pranay Ranjan, Raj Bahadur Yadav, D. L. Chidanand, Ritesh Kumar, Ms. Suhasini Sen, G. S. Makker, B. V. Balram Das, A. K. Kaul, Raj Bahadur, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Vijay Panjwani, S. Wasim A. Qadri, Zaid Ali Subzposh, Praveen Swarup, Gaurang Kanth, Sayan Ray, Soumo Palit, Ms. Eshita Baruah, B. C. Santosh Kumar, Ajay Bansal, Ms. Veena Bansal
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.