 "new Rs 500 currency notes")
The Supreme Court on Friday sought a response from the Centre on issues related to demonetisation, such as whether or not district cooperative banks can be allowed to accept deposits with certain conditions and could there be a minimum assured weekly withdrawal from banks.
The bench, headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur and comprising Justice A M Khanwilkar and Justice D Y Chandrachud, said when the minimum weekly withdrawal limit had been fixed, then why were people not able to get that amount. “Can we say that this will be the minimum assured weekly withdrawal amount that a person can get from the bank?”
Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi was also asked to seek instruction and apprise the court about the stand of the government on issues, including the bar on district cooperative banks accepting deposits in the old series Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 currency notes that have been made illegal.
The bench asked and fixed the batch of petitions for further hearing on Wednesday, 14 December.
The apex court drafted six preliminary issues raised by the demonetisation deadlock and is likely to refer them to a larger bench for answers, after hearing all parties concerned.
In Parliament, the news of the Supreme Court order brought smiles to Opposition parties, who were somewhat on the defensive after President Pranab Mukherjee had on Thursday criticised their “obstructionism” during the ongoing winter session.
Opposition leaders, who have shown rare unity with even arch-rivals Trinamool Congress and Communist Party of India (Marxist) making protests against the note ban a common cause, were seen showing Twitter alerts on their mobile phones to their colleagues.
The SC order was a jolt for the Bharatiya Janata Party, which on Thursday evening had issued a press statement to highlight the support that demonetisation has received from the people. The statement had also stressed that on Thursday the Karnataka High Court had dismissed a public interest litigation that had sought to question the “note ban”.
Rohatgi sought a direction that cases in various high courts on the demonetisation issue be stayed. The bench said it would take up this issue on next date of hearing.
It, however, declined to pass any interim relief as sought by dozens of petitioners. The court tried to pass an interim order to ease the inconvenience caused to the citizens without losing sight of the “larger purpose” of the government measure, but it could not devise an order in Friday’s hearing.
The bench was hearing the central government’s petition seeking to transfer scores of petitions pending in the high courts to the Supreme Court or to one high court for unity in the decision. The court was inclined to do it and might pass an order at the next hearing. The court would also finalise the questions which the next bench will decide. The present bench, headed by the chief justice, will change as he is retiring on January 3, after the year-end recess starting next Friday.
One of the main questions was whether the government had the power to pass the notifications it issued since the November 8 announcement by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. According to the petitions, moved by senior counsel Kapil Sibal, the manner in which the sudden declaration was done violated Section 26(2) of the Reserve Bank of India Act. The provision itself suffered from excessive delegation of power. Another petitioner pointed out several other sections of the Act which were violated by the government.
Another important question was the violation of the fundamental rights of citizens, their right to livelihood, the arbitrariness and unreasonableness of the notifications. The ban on withdrawal of the money of the depositors by them is also one of the main issues.
The plight of cooperative banks will get special attention as they are not given currency and a large section of the farmers and other ordinary people are not allowed to deposit or withdraw money for their daily lives. Former finance minister P Chidambaram spoke on their behalf. He said it would take seven months for the four presses to print the currency.
Attorney General Rohtagi wanted another proposition to be included: Whether the petitions are maintainable at all because the court cannot involve itself in fiscal policy. He also submitted political parties had moved some petitions which could not allowed. “They are not true public interest petitions, but political,” he said.
The Centre had on November 24 filed an affidavit in the apex court on demonetisation and had said the “bold move” would eradicate black money and slush funds operating since Independence.
On November 29, the apex court had agreed to hear pleas of 14 cooperative banks of Kerala seeking its nod to transact business like banks and others seeking demonetisation of any currency note higher than Rs 100 denomination.
