The bench said a political party has a platform like

The bench said a political party has a platform like

ZCZC
PRI GEN LGL NAT
.NEWDEL LGD9
SC-DROUGHT 2 LAST
The bench said a political party has a platform like
Parliament or the state assembly where it can raise its voice on a issue.
To this, Bhushan said “merely because political party has a platform, it should not be stopped from doing it. Political parties should be encouraged for pursuing a PIL which is for public interest”.
When the bench said that a political party can raise an issue in Parliament or assembly, he said they may not get redressal of their grievances there.
“If it (political party) uses court’s platform to settle political scores, the court could see it,” he said while referring to the issue of demonetisation raised by individuals as well as political parties.
However, the bench said since the issue of registration of ‘Swaraj India’ as political party was pending before the EC, it would wait for the poll panel’s decision in the matter.
During the hearing, Rohatgi placed before the bench the minutes of November 9 meeting held under the chairmanship of the Secretary, Department of Food and Public Distribution, in which issue of framing of rules under the National Food Security Act was discussed.
The bench asked the Centre that constitution of state food commissions and the eligibility criteria of its members should be as per prescribed provisions of the National Food Security Act.
The apex court fixed the matter for further hearing on January 18 next year.
Earlier, the court had asked the Centre to release all outstanding and necessary funds for MNREGA scheme to the states and directed it to pay compensation for delayed wages to the farmers in drought-affected areas.
The PIL has alleged that parts of 12 states — Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Odisha, Jharkhand, Bihar, Haryana and Chhattisgarh — were hit by drought and the authorities were not providing adequate relief.
The petitioners had claimed before court that directions given by the apex court in this matter were not complied with by the states. PTI ABA MNL SJK RKS
ARC
12011724
NNNN

PTI