Despite being specifically ticked off by the Supreme Court for blocking road and railway tracks during their earlier agitation for reservation last year, the jat community seems to be flouting the top court’s orders passed by two benches during the revived quota stir in Haryana and blocking several highways connecting the national capital.
While the first order against the jat agitation blocking roads linking Delhi was passed almost a year ago on March 24, 2011 by a bench of Justices Altamas Kabir and Dalveer Bhandari on the petitions of Indian Oil Corporation and Delhi Jal Board whose services were badly affected, the second order was passed by a bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and S.J. Mukhopadhaya on November 1, 2011.
“There should be no disruption of the supply of water and essential commodities. All essential commodities reaching Delhi either by road or rail should not be stopped. It is needless to say that the governments of the states concerned shall take necessary step in this regard,” the first order had said while taking note of the jat agitation in Uttar Pradesh and Haryana, which had also affected supply of petroleum products form Mathura and Panipat refinaries located in the two states respectively.
In the first order, the court also had taken serious view of the “tacit support” given by the parties in power in the two states, to the jat agitation due to “political reasons” and remineded their governments that they have “constitutional obligations” not only save public properties from being damaged but also ensure the free movement of road and rail traffic.
Unless the rule of law prevails, this court (SC) will continue to take drastic steps, the kind of which was not seen so far. The muscle power cannot prevail on the rule of law. This is our clear message to the governments concerned,” was the stern warning issued to the governments of Haryana and UP.
In the second order, the top court had put a straight question to the Centre and the governments of those states where such agitations in recent past had resulted in massive damage to public assets, “why do the governments not take preventive measures in such situations”. The court in this context had referred to the Manipur blockade by Naga agitators, Sikkim blockade by Gorkhaland agitators, Telangana movement, besides, the jat agitation.