1. Submission of a Commission of Inquiry report for judicial consideration. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1998 Supreme(SC) 1413
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.S. Verma, CJI., S.C. Agrawal, B.N. Kirpal, JJ.
Noida Entrepreneurs Association - Petitioner
Versus
Noida, others - Respondent
Writ Petition (C) No. 150 of 1997
Decided On, 06-01-1998
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, Senior Advocate, E.C. Vidya Sagar, Advocate.
For the Respondent:A.K. Goel, Additional Advocate General of U.P., Rakesh Dwivedi and G.L. Sanghi, Senior Advocate, Gopal Balwant Sathe, y.p. Mahajan, P. Parameswaran, Prem Pankaj, Anoop Bose, Alok Krishna Agarwal, Bharat Sangal, A.S. Pundir, R.B. Misra and Kamlendra Misra, Advocates.
For the Petitioner:Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, Senior Advocate, E.C. Vidya Sagar, Advocate.
For the Respondent:A.K. Goel, Additional Advocate General of U.P., Rakesh Dwivedi and G.L. Sanghi, Senior Advocate, Gopal Balwant Sathe, y.p. Mahajan, P. Parameswaran, Prem Pankaj, Anoop Bose, Alok Krishna Agarwal, Bharat Sangal, A.S. Pundir, R.B. Misra and Kamlendra Misra, Advocates.
The court required the State to file an affidavit from a high-ranking official (Secretary level or above) to formally state its acceptance or rejection of a Commission of Inquiry report and detail any follow-up actions before the court proceeds further in the matter.
Headnote:(A) Commission of Inquiry - Report - State's stand - Requirement for the State to indicate its position on a Commission of Inquiry report via an affidavit from a high-ranking official, not lower than Secretary to the Government, regarding the acceptance of the report and the precise follow-up measures to be taken. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
A report of a Commission of Inquiry was produced and taken on record by the court. The court sought to determine the position of the State government regarding the conclusions reached in the said report before proceeding further in the matter.
Findings of Court:
The court found it necessary to know the stand of the State government on the report, specifically whether the report has been accepted and, if so, what precise actions are to be taken as follow-up measures.
Issues: Whether the State government has accepted the findings of the Commission of Inquiry and what subsequent actions are planned based on those findings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that before proceeding further in a matter involving a Commission of Inquiry report, the State must formally declare its stand through an affidavit filed by a senior government official of a specified rank.
Result: State directed to file the requisite affidavit on or before 12.1.1998; matter listed for 13.1.1998.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Necessity of determining the State's position on the findings of a Commission of Inquiry before further proceedings. (Para 2 )
3. Direction to the State to file an affidavit from a high-ranking officer regarding the acceptance of the Commission's report and follow-up measures. (Para 2 )
4. What is the procedural requirement for a State government to respond to a Commission of Inquiry report in court?
The State must file an affidavit from an officer of a rank not lower than Secretary, stating whether the report is accepted and detailing the precise follow-up actions to be taken. (Para 2 )
ORDER :
J.S. Verma, J.
The learned counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh has produced a copy of the report of the Commission of Inquiry headed by Justice Murtaza Hussain, a former Judge of the Allahabad High Court. The same is taken on record. The copies of the same be furnished by the State of U.P. to the learned amicus curiae and Shri Sanghi, learned counsel for Respondent 7.
2. In view of the conclusions reached by the aforesaid Commission of Inquiry, it is necessary to know the stand of the State of U.P., in this behalf. The State of U.P. is required to indicate its stand on affidavit of a reasonable officer of a rank not lower than Secretary to the Government of U.P. indicating therein whether the Government of U.P. has accepted the report or not and if the report has been accepted, then the precise action it is to take as a follow-up measure pursuant thereto. It would be appropriate to know the stand of the Government of U.P. before proceeding further in the matter. The requisite affidavit be filed on or before 12.1.1998.
3. List on 13.1.1998 before the same Bench.
Court Masters.
