SC indicts HP court for equating maharaja with State

The heir – Raja Mahendra Pratap Singh – of the erstwhile princely state of Kangra approached the HC for issuance of a command to the State Forest Corporation, by treating himself equivalent to the HP Government, to confer monetary gains permissible to the State Government, on the basis of a decision of the pricing committee.

The HC granted the prayer sought by the maharaja and entitled him to relief claimed by him, as according to the HC he was found to have been deprived of the right to life as envisaged by Article 21 of the Constitution.

The HC observed, “We have held that the petitioner is entitled to enforce his claim, particularly the right to his livelihood, through this writ petition.” It was further held that he was, for all purposes, possessed with power of the government.

The HC held that the maharaja was entitled to interest on the delayed payment of royalty apart from damages in respect of illicit felling of trees. Also 100 per cent penalty was due to him for the illegally felled trees. He was further conferred with the grant of interest on interest and share in the levy of extension fee chargeable by the State from the corporation.

Setting aside the judgement of the HP High Court, Justice Sethi, who wrote the judgement for the bench said that the HC appeared to have adopted a very generous and casual approach in applying the right to livelihood to the facts and circumstances of the present case “apparently for the purpose of clothing itself with the power and jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.”

Justice Sethi pointed out that had the HC considered the argument in the right perspective and in the light of various pronouncements by the apex court, it would not have ventured to assume jurisdiction for the purposes of “conferring the State largesse of public money upon an unscrupulous litigant, who preferred his claims on his proclaimed assumption of being as important as the government of the State and equal thereto.”

“Despite independence of the country about half a century ago and establishment of a democratic set up with the declaration in the Constitution to have a secular, socialist republic in the country, there are people and organisations who have not mentally reconciled with the realities of life for various reasons including their vested interests.

Ignoring the establishment of the rule of law and the development of the constitutional set up, they have made and are making fanatic efforts to sabotage the path of the goal intended to achieve the welfare of the society,” Justice Sethi observed in his judgement.