Back
2002 Supreme(Gau) 359
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
P. P. NAOLEKAR C.J. AND A. H. SAIKIA, J.
Jugal Baruah and etc -Appellant
Versus
Union of India and others -Respondent
PIL Nos. 11 and 15 of 2002
Decided On : 26-08-2002
A. R. Borthakur, Sr. Advocate, D. K. Misra, Sr. Advocate, P. Borthakur, B. Acharya, T. N. Srinivasan and D. K. Das C. Choudhury, Sr. CGSC and Y. Doley, Addl. CGSC
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of judicial review in matters of policy decisions, particularly those adopted in the national interest on security reasons, which are immune from judicial review.
Headnote:
PIL - Shifting of SSB Unit from N. E. Region - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - 29-6-2001, 19-2-2001, 12-4-2002, 24-4-2002 - The court discussed the proposed shifting of the Special Service Bureau (SSB) from the North Eastern Region to the Indo-Nepal Border. The court analyzed the policy decision of the Government and its impact on national security, considering the recommendations made on 19-2-2001 and the orders dated 12-4-2002 and 24-4-2002. The court highlighted the limited scope of judicial review in matters of policy decisions and emphasized that a policy decision adopted in the national interest on security reasons is immune from judicial review.
Fact of the Case:
The Writ Petitions were filed as Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking judicial intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the proposed shifting of the entire establishment of Special Service Bureau (SSB) from North Eastern Region to various other places in Indo-Nepal Border in the States of West Bengal and Bihar. The Petitioners alleged that the proposed shifting was arbitrary and illegal, and sought a mandamus not to give effect to the proposed move.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the policy decision of the Government to shift the SSB Unit from the N. E. Region to the Indo-Nepal Border was based on reasonableness and fairness, and not contrary to law or mala fide. The court held that the shifting was made in the public interest on security reasons and dismissed the Writ Petitions as not maintainable.
Issues: The main issue revolved around the legality and validity of the proposed shifting of the SSB Unit from the N. E. Region to the Indo-Nepal Border, and whether it warranted judicial intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the limited scope of judicial review in matters of policy decisions, emphasizing that a policy decision adopted in the national interest on security reasons is immune from judicial review. The court also highlighted the parameters for entertaining a PIL, emphasizing the need for redressal of public injury, enforcement of public duty, protection of social rights, and vindication of public interest.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the Writ Petitions as not maintainable, holding that the policy decision of the Government to shift the SSB Unit from the N. E. Region to the Indo-Nepal Border was not arbitrary or discriminatory, and was made in the public interest on security reasons.
A. H. SAIKIA, J. :- Both these Writ Petitions have been filed under the nomenclature of Public Interest Litigation (hereinafter referred to as PIL) seeking judicial intervention of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India projecting the grievances against the proposed swifting of the entire establishment of Special Service Bureau (for short SSB.) from North Eastern Region (hereinafter called as N. E. Region) by the respondents-Union of India and others, for its deployment to various other places in Indo-Nepal Border in the States of West Bengal and Bihar. Since both the writ Petitions carry a common issue based on similar and identical factual matrix, we propose to hear both the matters analogously and thereby to dispose of the same by this common order.
2. The entire pivot of the controversy revolves round the proposed shifting of S. S. B. Unit from N. E. Region especially from Assam and Arunachal Pradesh to other parts of the country.
3. The common case, in short compass, of the Petitioners is that the SSB being a Para Military Force (for short the Force) under the Ministry of Home, Govt. of India, has been formed as far back as in 1963 following the Indo-China War in the year 1962 with specific aims and objectives to check border infiltration providing vital intelligence in puts from the remote areas and to perform social activities for all round growth and development of rural population in remote and border areas of the N. E. Region bordering the neighbouring countries namely Bhutan, China, Myanmar and Bangladesh. While S. S. B., manned by a strong determined Force of over 30,000 (thirty thousand) trained Volunteers working in different Divisional Headquarters located in four Divisional Headquarters of N. E. Region and other Area Headquarters spreading across the seven States, has been discharging and performing their respective duties and works with utmost sincerity and committed devotion in these sensitive areas in the interest of security of the country. But suddenly the Respondents are seeking to shift the entire S. S. B. Unit from the N. E. Region to other parts of the country, namely West Bengal, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh for the reasons best known to them. Such hurried and hasty decision of shifting of this vital Organisation has been taken by the Respondents without specifying any valid and acceptable reasons and more importantly without the knowledge and against the sentiments of the people of this Region. This unanticipated action on the part of the respondents in shifting the SSB which has already been estimated as one of the best forces for its commendable social and voluntary services in this region, without showing any cogent or overwhelming justification, is an arbitrary and illegal exercise of administrative powers so vested upon the respondents and therefore a mandamus has been sought not to give effect to the proposed move to shift SSB with lock, stock and barrel from this region.
4. Be it noted that in PIL No. 11/2002 the Petitioner is a business man having his permanent residence at Tezpur in the State of Assam and has been associated actively with several sociocultural organisation in the District and the State. By this Public Interest Litigation, the Petitioner has sought to agitate an issue that involves public interest on behalf of the large number of people who are in a disadvantage position on account of the social and economic disabilities./impediment and are unable to approach this Honble Court to assail and enforce their rights on account of their incapacities.
5. The Petitioner in PIL No. 15/2002, being an ex-service man of SSB, is a social worker having his residence at Gohpur Tiniali in the Papumpare District in the State of Arunachal Pradesh and have also been actively associated with the several socio-cultural Organisation in the State of Arunachal Pradesh. Being a social worker and deeply concerned with the issues of topical as well as public interest, the Petitione
