Dara8217;s locus standi questioned

CHANDIGARH, Feb 2: Hearing arguments on the application seeking stay on Sikh Gurdwara Judicial Commission's order restraining Manjit Sing...

CHANDIGARH, Feb 2: Hearing arguments on the application seeking stay on Sikh Gurdwara Judicial Commission8217;s order restraining Manjit Singh Calcutta from functioning as the SGPC8217;s senior secretary, a division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court today questioned former Commission member Dara Singh8217;s locus standi to file the plea.

The bench, comprising Justice G.S. Singhvi and Justice Iqbal Singh, asked counsel representing the applicant, whether the parties directly aggrieved G.S.Tohra and Calcutta had moved the court against the interim order of the Commission.

The bench also questioned counsel for the applicant regarding the authenticity of the affidavit furnished by Dara Singh claiming that he was neither permitted to take the order8217;s copy nor allowed to inspect the file. The deputy advocate general had earlier stated that a false affidavit had been submitted by Dara Singh as he had not applied for the certified copy of the interim order passed by the judicial commission.

It was incorrect to say that the application for inspecting the court file had been disallowed. In fact, the Commission had permitted the same in writing for February 1, the High Court was informed.

The High Court adjourned the matter to February 8 for further arguments after Dara Singh8217;s counsel sought the postponement of the proceedings for three days so as to know the fate of application moved by Calcutta before the Judicial Commission seeking revoking of the interim order.

Meanwhile, replying to the queries, Dara Singh8217;s counsel stated that the applicant, being a member of the Judicial Commission which had not been dissolved, did have the locus standi to file the present application. The counsel alleged that the three members of the Commission, including Dara Singh, had been removed without following the proper procedure, adding that their prime concern, was to stop the Commission from discharging its functions.

Regarding the court being moved by Tohra, the counsel stated that the SGPC president8217;s appeal against the Commission8217;s order had been fixed for February 3. Calcutta, he agreed, had also moved an application before the Commission for reconsidering the order.

Story continues below this ad

Denying the State counsel8217;s allegations of a false affidavit being furnished by the applicant, he stated that there had been an quot;inadvertent slipquot; in the application and admitted that the 8220;expression should have been more clear.8221;

A common counsel representing a number of respondents before the Commission had moved the application for inspection and the order8217;s copy. The common application, he added, had been moved as to enable them to provide photocopies of the order to others.