REGISTRAR GENERAL Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned Advocate General, Meghalaya and the Director General of Police, Mr Mehta, and perused the writ petition. Registrar General of this Court has put up an office note on the basis of press clippings and informations regarding the impact of "Bandh" on the presence of Court Staff and also on essential services, like hospitals and medical shops etc. As per administrative order of the even date, the Office Report has been directed to be registered as WP(C)No. 127 of 2015.

(2.) It appears from the averment of Office note/writ petition that there are 71 indoor patients and 248 OPD patients in various hospitals of Shillong. It also appears that 20% of High Court staff and lawyers practicing in the District Court of West Jaintia Hills District, Jowai, are absent on account of calling of bandh. The District Court, West Jaintia Hills District could not function because of absence of lawyers. The bandh has been called by the organization called "Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council" (for short "HNLC") which is said to have been banned as unlawful association for a further period of five years by the order dated 25.05.2015 passed by the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Tribunal, Delhi. It has become a regular feature in the day to day life of Meghalaya, particularly, the City of Shillong to observe bandh even on a hoax call in the name of this organization said to be operating from the territory of Bangladesh with a limited and dwindling cadre. It is reported that as a result of today's bandh of Meghalaya called by the outfit, "HNLC" for 48 hours, the even tempo of otherwise peaceful public life has been badly disturbed. Even the medical shops, hotels and conveyance services are not available to the native citizens. Thus, the "bandh" has violated the fundamental rights of common citizens as guaranteed in Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) A Full Bench of Kerala High Court way back in 1998 in the case of Bharat Kumar K Palicha and another vs. State of Kerala and others, 1997 AIR(Ker) 291 held that such bandhs can be taken notice of by the High Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India because it violates the fundamental rights of the citizens. The court has also held that the political parties and organizations can be asked to recoup the loss and damages suffered by the citizens of their lives and private properties, and by the Govt. in the case of damage to public properties. The Full Bench judgment of the Kerala High Court was upheld by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Communist Party of India (M) vs. Bharat Kumar and others, 1998 1 SCC 201. Hon'ble the Apex Court, while upholding the judgment passed by the full bench of Kerala High Court, also made a distinction between "bandh" and "harthal". According to the Court, bandh violates the fundamental rights of the people as a whole which cannot be made subservient to the claim of fundamental rights of individual or a section of the people. The Govt. was also asked to take steps to recoup the loss suffered by the citizens from the sponsors and organizers of such bandh.