Plight of living Ghosts in India Lal Bihari who was declared deceased in 1976 has tried his best by agitating his grievance before the revenue authority of District Azamgarh saying that I am here , I am alive but the reply came that according to land registry office you are dead

Plight of living Ghosts in India

(One Lal Bihari who was declared deceased in 1976 has tried his best by agitating his grievance before the revenue authority of District Azamgarh saying that I am here , I am alive but the reply came that according to land registry office you are dead by unruffled officials .Lal Bihari sought his arrest , tried to run for parliament , kidnapped the child and stolen the property , threaten murder , insulted judges through leaflets listing his complaints at legislatures of U.P State assembly and demanded widow's pension for his wife . Each time he was beaten up by police or rebuked for wasting officials time . Unable to make headway , Lal Bihari , the dead , sought the company of other ghost in Uttar Pradesh a dozen of these ghost demonstrated outside the U.P assembly to publicise their fate but nothing in last 18 years to get his life . Ultimately sue motto notice was taken by the High Court Allahabad which was highlighted in Times magazines and finally the matter has been refereed to National Human rights Commission by Allahabad High Court by its judgement dated 7.1.2000 in writ petition no 29806 of 1999 which is reported in Selected Allahabad Cases to which I am an Editor of the aforesaid journal .)

The Times Magazine , Asia Edition July 19th ,1999 published an article that "Bribe an official in eastern fringes of India's state of Uttar Pradesh and declare the owner of the Land dead and transfer his land to your name . Our constitution which is considered with its gospel to achieve and resolve through its processor of therapeutic justice to escalating Psychosomatic melodies and explosive rights without enforceable duties to its citizen is generating spiralling delinquencies as envisaged in an Article " Constitutional resurrections " published in view point of a newspaper on 3rd May 1998 by Yogesh Kumar Saxena practising at Allahabad High Court has something to express on this aspect as to why the quest of mankind is to grasp the fundamental truth , the tenacity without even the least touch of faith in reality which has diminished the entire surroundings and undergone a radical transformation to the point of extinction under our constitution . For further details, you may see the extract of the interview taken with Yogesh Kumar Saxena ,a constitutional Lawyer by Manisha Parikh for India World .co. in in Samchar .com with reference to a judgement in reference to Writ petition no 29806 of 1999 Association of Dead People and another Vs State of U.P decided on 7.1.2000 and published in (2000) 1 selected Allahabad Cases page 374 to which Mr. Saxena is an Editor .

Question: What do you think about the aforesaid verdict in which a living farmer who have been declared as deceased by unscrupulous people and he ( Shri Lal Bihari ) and he contested his case from 1976 to seek a declaration as to be still alive and whether our judiciary conferred with the power of judicial review under our constitution has been successful to deal with the plight of living dead ?

Answer :The constitution is supreme and all the three pillars functions under its strict supervision . the supremacy of the parliament and the power of the Hon'ble Constitutional Courts in India have gone through a consistent efforts for providing a harmonious construction to build up a foundation on which our country may survive . The doctrine of immunity from legislation against the enactment through legislation has undergone a great struggle whenever the Hon'ble Constitutional Court found the infringement of fundamental rights of the citizen . However on account of excessive burden and the need for securing the effective exercise of the judicial review by the Hon'ble Constitutional Courts even with regards to Administrative action , there is an unchecked flow of litigation for every invasion of the right under the garb of the infringement of the fundamental rights.

Question .Whether you speculate in this process any tough battle for securing the basic structure of our constitution with the doctrine of Supremacy of the parliament and how far it is important for the healthy growth of our welfare state .

Answer The rigours to demotion of judicial writ power by some of the constitutional amendments like 42nd Amendment has been declared ultra virus in Minerva Mills Case (1980) 3 S.CC 625 , Waman Rao case (1981) 2 S.C.C 362 and in L. Chandra Kumar case (1997 ) 3 S.C.C 261 reaffirming the majority verdict of the landmark judgement of Keshavananda Bharti case of 13 judge constitution bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court . The jurisdiction conferred upon the Hon'ble constitutional Courts including the High Courts under Article 226 and Article 227 has been held as a part of the basic structure of the constitution. Thus not even the power of legislative enactment but also the power conferred under Article 368 to Amend the constitution may be subjected to judicial review by the Apex Court .

Question Whether you think that in this process the expression "Procedure established by Law " as enshrined in Article 21 has now been replaced by "due process of law" as evident in American Constitution ?

Answer: Article 14 has two concepts which is a unique feature in Indian constitution. Most of the constitutions of the world either speaks of "equality before the law" or the "equal protection of the laws". Both these concepts although appears to be the same are not actually the same . The equality before the law refers as to providing the equality before the substantive laws of the nation as illustrated in Article 15 to 18 and also under Article 38, 39, 39A, 41and 46 of the constitution . The connotation equal protection of law contemplates for minimising the inequalities and for eliminating the inequalities in status , facilities , opportunities , values of lives with social care towards educational and economic interest not only amongst citizen but also amongst the group of the citizens. This Article forbids class legislation except being founded on an intelligible differential and to have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the statute in question . The test of classification must be rational . However by the efflux of time , Article 21 which is couched in negative language by the framers of our Constitution has undergone the major change by interpretation through its positive angle having the inhibition contained therein i.e. "life " as synonymous to "livelihood" by taking into consideration that by abrogation and subjugation of the means of the living there shall be no life . This was done to get the rid of the radical innovation providing an instrument of status quo upholding the traditions of Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence and resisting radical innovation in the use of judicial power to promote social change by the so called judicial activism . The other concepts such as "Rule of Law" , "Judicial restraint" , "Separation of power", supremacy of fundamental right s over directive principles and "Procedure established under Law" conveniently to avoid change whenever possible through the assistance of two concepts of Article 14 as whenever required delete it and whenever inevitable dilute it as far as practicable and thus the discretionary powers were exercised in the different manner by inviting the diversities in the opinion of the constitutional Courts while dealing with Quasi judicial actions .

Question : Thus you mean to say that Article 21 of the constitution is not a fundamental right of the citizen as is being dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and has been included in the chapter of fundamental rights ?

Answer True , Article 21 has been included in the chapter of fundamental right under our constitution but the same is a fundamental duty of the government as to provide protection against depriving any person of his life or personal liberty . There is only one individual fundamental right of the citizen i.e Article 19 . Article 25 and 26 is a collective right to the freedom of conscience and right to profess , practise and propogate religion and also to manage religious affairs . Thus every fundamental duty casted upon the government which is providing the protection to the individual may be read with the reasonable restrictions as contemplated in sub articles (2)to (6) of Article 19 of our constitution thus the constitution has provided a "check and balance" over the power of the Hon'ble Courts and the duties casted upon the government . In this manner the Hon'ble Courts while interpreting these Articles of fundamental rights may dealt with the individual as to whether the right which implies the forbearance to perform the duty by the Government has got the qualification prescribed in the yard stick of the reasonable restrictions or the constitution with the galaxy of so called fundamental right may be ruled in respect of its governance by the political set-up having co-ordination with divisive forces to the oppression of the people at large which has not been done after independence.

Question: What was the need of introducing Article 51A when already there were fundamental duties of the Government ?

Answer: Every right implies the forbearance on the part of other to perform his duty as right and duty is co-related and co-existent. After independence our country has been ruled with governance through laissez faire and the citizens have miserably forgotten there duties under the spirit of availing an aspirant cherished freedom . Thus the chapter of unenforceable fundamental duties was introduced with effect from 3.1.1977 by 42nd amendment .

Question : Why there is a pendency of number of litigation before the Constitutional Courts in which the case of the living people who have been declared as dead people in the official records have not been dealt with in time .?

Answer The right of the people has been considered in the different dimension against every atrocities committed by the administration in discharge of their duty as the custodian of the public trust . The concept of public trust doctrine was developed by the Constitutional Courts to provide the safety to an individual as susceptible to abuse in discharge of the role by our Constitutional courts as a sentinel on quivive . The maxim of "ubi us ibi remedium" (where there is a right , there is a remedy ) was sparingly applied in respect of administrative action without considering as to whether the same is quasi judicial or not . The separation of power which was embodied to certain extent in our constitution and having its elasticity to provide pervasive potency and versatile quality has been diluted in absence of any accountability towards administrative action. Thus there was a flow of litigation before the constitutional Courts even in respect of violation of every right for which the administrative authority were responsible to exercise their power as the custodian of the public duty .Thus due to paucity of time , the genuine litigation was circumvented by unscrupulous litigation and there by suppressing the fundamental right of a bonafide citizen .

Question: Do you think that the present system can be rectified by enacting more legislation by the parliament or it may be left to the Constitutional Courts to eradicate the prevailing maladies ?

Answer There must be an accountability fixed with every officer and bureaucrats in the society regarding there abuse of power and judicial review which comprises the power of judicial superintendence over every sub-ordinate authority may be necessarily applied by the higher judiciary .There is a requirement of complete separation of power between three institutions on which our democratic set-up is dependent the adequate punishment be implemented in the deterrent and punitive manner as to create an example to the other wrong do-er specially under the circumstances when the integrity and the prosperity of the nation is involved. In case of malafide exercise of power not only the action which is done contrary to the object may be rectified but there may be a judicial scrutiny for recommending the departmental disciplinary proceeding against the official who has passed such order with extraneous considerations. There should be the limit over the privilege conferred with every public servant who is not only a custodian of the power but also owe the duties towards the citizens who are considered in our constitution as the sovereign of the sovereignty .

Question: What do you think to be the source of the power of judicial review ?

Answer :It may be traced to the classic enunciation of the principles laid down by the Chief Justice John Marshall of U.S Supreme Court in Marbury Vs Madison ( 1 Crunch : 2 L Ed 60 (1803 ) ) as the origin of this power is never attributed to one source alone . It has been laid down that the judiciary dealing with interpretation of Law is duty bound while expounding and interpreting the Law and to see as to whether the Law is repugnant to the settled norms of the constitutions otherwise the same be declared as void .In America where the Supreme Court has assumed extensive power of reviewing the legislative Acts while in our constitution this power is conferred by the expressed provision contained in Article 13 of the constitution of India . Thus the power of judicial review has now considered to be an integral part of our constitutional system .

Question: What do you think to be the role of the Advocates in the process of judicial discipline and thereby providing a check and balance over mis utilisation of the judicial and quasi judicial power by the public servant ?

Answer : In America the Lawyers may conduct the investigation in respect of the wrong committed with the people through their own investigation agencies and there is there is the power vested with every officer to deal with the mis use of power by any person without taking the accent from the higher elechon in the hierarchical set-up of superior authority in some of the European countries .However in India we have no such power to fix an accountability towards a public wrong by an Advocate and also by any honest official as there is a vicious circle in our Bureaucratic set-up where there is larger privilege and lesser responsibility. Thus we have become a silent spectator of the situation which is going to be the worst by the process of time . The apathy of the intellectual echoes back into a vacuum which has neither any ventilation for providing the fresh air to our people . Till such time when the intellectuals in the society may not be allowed to run the public administration nothing can be achieved in our nation.

Justice is the end of government just to enjoy the peace of mind. Law is a means to an end. The essence of law is duty. It is a result of constraint struggle; an struggle of conflict with a view to attain peace and order. Law is the guaranty  of condition of life in society assured by the state‘s power constrain. Thus the legal institution may provide the stability in the political sphere ,if we start thinking in the process of rectification of the present problem enunciated by theoretical approach and by the correct analysis of the sociological jurisprudence to promote sociological study in connection with the legal study is the fundamental right for preparation of legislation , which may improve by intelligent effort discovering the best means of furthering and directing such efforts . Thus it is very essential to learn the basic principle of jurisprudence and adopt a positive approach for imparting the justice to the individual litigant in the society.

Jurisprudence means systematic knowledge of the law .It is known as science of law Thus the jurisprudence may be considered to be systematic arrangement of the principle of the law  the principle of the law, the principle duly recognised or enforced by the public and legal institution in the administration of the justice .The general rule of external human action enforced  the sovereign political authority in the common law . Jurisprudence is concerned with fundamental conception , the sovereignty does not reside in the legislatures or executives ,but in the total aggregate of persons , who are members of state and are primarily represented by the existing body of electors. The instrumentality of sovereign is endowed with powers to be exerted with on behalf of the legislature cannot invoke the sovereign power of the people to override their will . Thus the sovereignty is vested in the people and not with the government to exercise their sovereign powers . If the government   ignores the protection of social interests of the people then it has no authority to discharge its sovereign powers. Thus one has to find that the sovereign power is exercising its functioning in the ultimate interest of the people , which may attribute sovereignty  to that entity .

Jurisprudence is the eye of law. It is innovation of the legal invention for protection of Human behaviour, which maintain intense relationship  for advancement of mankind . Thus the jurisprudence is the wisdom of law , which is the ultimate purpose in pursuit of the advancement of Human conduct , If we are not aware with the realities of the life and the problems of the society , we may not be discharging the duties of sovereignty . The legal institution may not serve its purpose if other considerations have the over riding effect and there after the habitual obedience from bulk of human society will completely be vanished . Thus there should  be the attempt to change the law within a reasonable living stream , but it may not become stagnant pool of conflicting precedents. If the subject of the law is the science of the man to the political ethics , the legislation may perfectly regard  to discharge its duty in the strictest sense The science is not limited to the study of external conduct. Thus the first requirement of law is to correspond with the  actual feeling and demand of community . The guardian of the law have made no serious efforts to curb the number of cases and they could not be worked out inspite several assurance of the Hon’ble Court.

The Hon’ble Supreme court in the S.P. Sampath Kumar Vs  Union of India 1987 (1)SCC Page 124 , while dealing with the provision of section 28 of the Administrative Tribunal Act , 1965 , laid down that the exclusion of the High Court jurisdiction under the Article 226 and 227  of judicial review in service matters It was held by the five Hon’ble Judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court concurring judgement that  the said act would not be rendered unconstitutional .It was held that Article 323-A authorising exclusion  of the jurisdiction must provide for an effective alternative institutional mechanism or authority for judicial  review . The supreme Court has referred the decision  of Minerva Mills Ltd. Vs Union of India A.I.R 1980 S.C Page 1789 wherein it was held that the judicial review is the basic and essential feature of the constitution and  if the power of judicial review is abrogated or taken away the constitution will cease to be what it is. However it was held that if the power of the high court are curtailed from judicial review and it is vested  in any other institutional mechanism or authority , it would not be violative of basic structure doctrine.

The central administrative tribunal was given the jurisdiction parallel to the jurisdiction vested under Article 226 and 227 of the High Court. By virtue of such power it was held in the case of union of India Vs Paramananda A.I.R 1989 S.C Page 1185 that “ we must unequivocally state that the jurisdiction of the tribunal to interfere with the disciplinary matters for punishment cannot be equated with an appellate jurisdiction . The tribunal cannot interfere with the finding of the enquiry officer or competent authority , where there are no arbitrary or utterly perverse . It is appropriate to remember  that the power to impose penalty on a delinquent officer , is conferred on competent authority either by Act of legislature or rules made under the provision of article 309 of the constitution . If there has been an enquiry consistent with the Rules and in accordance with the principles of natural justice , what punishment would meet the ends of justice  is matter exclusively within the jurisdiction of the competent authority or the penalty can be lawfully imposed and is imposed on the proved misconduct , the tribunal have no power to substitute to his own discretion for that of the authority .This principle was consistently followed in Govt. of Tamilnadu Vs A Raza Pandian A.I.R 1995 S.C.Page 561 ,State of Tamilnadu Vs S . Subramanian A.I.R 1996 S.C Page 1232 and state of Tamilnadu Vs Thiru K.V Perurmal A.I.R1996 S.C page 2474 .

The supply of th ecopy of the enquiry report to the delinqent seeking his explanation against the proposed action was considered after the case of Union of India Vs Ramzan Khan J.T 1990 (4) S.C page 556 , in the case of Managing Director ECIL Hyderabad Vs B.Karunakar reported in J.T 1993 (6) S.C page 1 was considered that it is the right of the employee to have the report to defend himself effectively and he would not know in advance whether the report is in his favour or against him . It will not be proper to construe his failure to ask for the report ,as waiver of his right .However , this precedent remain valid upto the period when the supreme court in the case of S.K.Singh Vs Central Bank of India 1996 (6)S.C.C page 415 has laid down that the non supply of enquiry report is in consequential if no prejudice is caused. The Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of State Bank Patiala Vs  S.K. Sharma reported in A.I.R 1996 S.C page no 1669 has laid down that an order passed imposing a punishment on an employee consequent upon the departmental enquiry ,while dealing with such case ,.The Hon’ble Court in case of a procedural provision mandatory in character if found to have waived or in such situation where the rule of Audi -Alteram partem has not been applied ,then the order of punishment cannot be set-aside on the ground of said violation until the test of prejudice may be called to the delinquent. Thus ultimately further curtailing the scope of judicial review as was being exercised by the central administrative tribunal was visualised  during the course of arguments and in getting the judgement from the Tribunal to the delinquent Govt. Servant was visualised during this period .

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgement reported in 1997(3) S.C.C page 261 L.Chandra Kumar Vs Union of India consisting of seven Hon’ble judges has now over ruled the earlier judgement of five Hon’ble Judges constitutional bench in Sampath Kumar case. It has been laid down on the basis on the basis of Keshavanand Bharti case decided by the power of judicial review vested in the High Court under the Article 226and 227 is part of the basic structure of the constitution . Judicial review comprises of three aspects ;Judicial review of legislative action , Judicial review of judicial decisions and judicial review of Administrative action tribunal is not a substitute for the high Court .Thus section 28 of the Administrative tribunal Act  divesting the jurisdiction of of the High Court in relation to the service matter and article 323-A and 323-B of the constitution of this extent are unconstitutional . The Hon’ble Supreme court has laid down that until a whole independent agency for administration of  all such Tribunals may not be set up and the entire system may not be languished and ultimate consumer of the justice under the supervision of the Administrative function may not be formulated by the Union of India .The system  may carry on and the tribunal will continue to act like courts of  first instance in respect of the areas of law which they have been constituted .Thus the tribunal on account of this judgement instead of exercising the power of judicial review as is being exercised by the High Court under Article 226 and 227 of the constitution of India is conferred with the jurisdiction of the court of first instance in respect of areas referred under sec 14 and 15 of Administrative tribunal Act , 1985

Now the question arises what is the significance of judicial accountability in respect of conflicting judgement of the Apex court which are meant to exercise the jurisdiction as that of the law  of the nation. The first requirement of a sound body of law is that it should be correspond with the actual feeling and demand of the community. A law embodies beliefs that has triumphed in the battle of ideas and then translated themselves into action . The legal Institution of the knowledge of jurisprudence and the social requirement of imparting justice to the litigants requires that the exercise of the judicial precedents may not be top harror and unconscionable as it may loss site from the very basis for which the law is meant for we cannot confine ourselves to the formal legal; materials ,but we have to go beyond to find out now people  actually  live in the society . The centre of  gravity of legal development lies not in legislative nor jurist’s science nor in judicial decision but in society itself . If we want the real law regulating the people , we have to become aware with the hardships suffered by the litigant people and for now the same is being is ignored as what is in actual practise governing the relations of the employer and employee , some limit has to be drawn because otherwise jurisprudence will dissipate its energy over too widen area .

The requirement of the society in the present political set-up is not mere formality , but it requires an accountability of each and every public officer who are exercising their powers through quasi judicial functioning vested with them in dealing with the departmental proceedings against the delinquent employee. Till suitable restrictions in exercise of such  discretionary powers vested with the superior authority may not be enforced through the proper legislation or administrative instructions and punishment of warning . Adverse entry, censor and stoppage of the increment may not be imposed against the superior officers exercising his power by making  an abuse of misuse of his discretionary power, may not be imposed in the case of failure to discharge  such obligation, when the Hon’ble  Court or the administration found the lapses and dereliction of the duties on their part , the justice cannot be given to the delinquent ,simultaneously for frivolous litigation should also dealt with exemplary cost against the fraudulent litigants as fraud and justice never dwell together and fraud and deceit defend or excuse no man .The Hon’ble  Supreme Court in the cases of S.P.Changalvaraya Naidu (dead) by L.R Vs Jagan Nath (dead) by L.R repoted in A.I.R 1994 S.C 853 ,inre, Indian Bank Vs M/s Satyam Fibres  J.T 1996 (7)S.C. 265 and in the case of Municipal Corp. of Delhi Vs Kamla Devi A.I.R 1996 S.C page 1733 has dealt with this aspect and found such proceedings by way of sharp practice , which are designed to abuse process of law and impose exemplary cost against the litigants . It its the need of the time the very public office should have its accountability in respect of discharging its legal obligations and for that purpose , there should be the appointments of the officers and the legal experts instead of leaving the matter to the discretion of the administration only then the justice may be realised to the individuals from the courts of law. Mankind must either give themselves a law and regulate their life by it or live no better than to limit natural liberty of a particular man such a manner as they might not hurt anyone. A herd of wolves is quieter and more  reasonable than the mob for one reason or other . According to Hindu Mythology , it is meant to regulate the human conduct amidst diversities of inclinations and desire so as to reconcile harmonically to the wishes of the individual wityh the interest of the community , while according to Mohhmadden law the purpose of the law is to promote welfare of he man , the improvement of morals by keeping the preservations of the life ,property and reputation. Its purpose is to encourage obedience by offer of reward and to discourage obedience by imposition of severe penalty . Thus the object of the law according to Hindu mythology in not to the punishment of  the sins, but to prevent certain external results , while according to Mohammedan law , it is the obedience by offer of the reward and as such even the capital punishment  is regarded appropriate in certain cases .

The importance of the justice is the wisdom of the law , as the law is without doubt a remedy for greater evils , yet it brings with it evils of its own . The object of the criminal justice may be referred from the angle of its implementation in the society . The deterrent aspect ofd the punishment is to protect society .According to Hindu Mythology penalty keeps then people under control , penalty protects them , penalty remains awake when people are asleep , so the vice have regarded the punishment as the source of righteousness. The preventive aspect concentrates on the prisoners to prevent them for offending again in future . The retributive theory is considered to allow the victim to take the revenge . Plato was the supporter of his theory to quote him ; “ If justice is good the health of soul as in justice is its disease , chastisement is its own remedy” Judicial punishment are serve as  a mean  ---- good for the society . Everyone gets what is his due according to his deeds. The re-affirmative theory  with the object to bring the moral reform of offender which unfortunately has been adopted as that of criminal justice has assume undue prominence on the other aspects of the criminal justice . This is the reason why the crime has now perpetuated in every sort of walk of life.

Let us examine the actual purpose of the legal institution in the context of providing justice to the individual . Society has now emerged with a complete deteriorated conditions of life. The existence of the individual citizen is on the stake in every walk of life . If we forgot the realities and start building the new structure on the basis of hypothetical presumptions ,we are bound to fail in administrative of justice . Now a day every proceedings based on the basis of evidence and what to say about the evidence when the very existence of the individual citizen is in itself deceptive. If we start adjudicating the cause on the basis of false evidence , the legal institution is bound to collapse . The custodian of the public interest are now playing the role of pirate . The robbery is committed with a licence by the Govt. servant . In such situation one should realise that it is only the accountability of the individual official in respect of his function , only then the society can survive . If we keep on having the expectations without rectification  of the prevailing maladies , where the litigation are instituted with the falsehood and there is no accountability of the erring individual in such process by imposition of the proper punishment , justice can never be imparted from the court of law .There happens some shock thrilling experience in day to day life as that of every individual happens to think over the present set-up of the parliamentarian democracy in the context of the law enforceable agencies , who have become the pathetic observer of the surrounding over them . The day light robbery is committed of the passengers travelling inside the bus and when they proceed in the direction  to lodge the report in the competent Police Station then the robber again enter and return back the looted articles under the protest that the valuable are of the lesser value then they ought to provide to the concern Police Officer as to get exoneration  from the punishment . If the miscreant are threatened with the toy automatic Rifles and per chance  the threatening is succeeded then next repercussion happens by the unwarranted query from the police officer regarding the factum of unauthorised weapon in the custody of the house keeper and thereafter on relieving the substance of the truth in respect of false threatening given by him , the police department from the scene and miscreants again comes and kill the house keeper , who is the informer ?If the execution of the crime is on the behest of the police  then how the society may be protected and what the legal institution will help to solve the basic problem . Thus it is only the  deterrent theory of punishment , which can provide protection to the society .