THE JHARKHAND STORY NETWORK

Ranchi, Dec. 20: The Jharkhand Assembly on Wednesday readopted the bill related to the local policy based on the 1932-based khatiyan (land records).

Governor CP Radhakrishnan had returned it after seeking opinion of the Attorney general who described some of the provisions as unconstitutional.

Finance Minister Dr Rameshwar Oraon tabled the local policy bill in the House.

Chief Minister Hemant Soren from the government side and Leader of Opposition Amar Bauri from the opposition side expressed their views on this. After this, Speaker Rabindranath Mahto asked both the parties whether they were in favour of it or against it. After this the bill was passed by voice vote.

Last year, the Assembly passed the bill and proposed to include it in the Ninth Schedule. The Attorney General raised some objections on this.

Also Read: Ex-IPS officer registers FIR against six Jharkhand State Cricket Association officials 

Khatian of 1932 is linked to identity of tribals: CM

Discussing the bill related to defining locals in the light of the Governor’s message, Chief Minister Hemant Soren said that 1932 Khatiyan -based local policy is linked to the identity of crores of tribals and indigenous people of this state. “This is their much awaited demand. In accordance with his sentiments and aspirations,” he added.

Attorney General has praised Jharkhand govt: Soren

The chief minister said in the House that the advice given by the Attorney General, in paragraphs 9 to 15, has completely justified the definition of a local and providing facilities on its basis. He has appreciated the efforts of the Jharkhand government, he added.

“But, in relation to the Supreme Court’s order in Cheeblu Leela Prasad Rao vs. Andhra Pradesh and Satyajit Kumar vs. State of Jharkhand for consultation on Section 6 of the Bill, I would like to tell the House that both the decisions are not relevant in the context of the present bill”, the CM said.

State government can make rules under Article 309

The chief minister said that in both the orders, the Supreme Court said that under paragraph 5 (1) of the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, the Governor does not have the right to make laws or amend them. The State Assembly has this power to make rules under Article 309 of the Constitution. “Therefore, we decided to make a bill and get the consent of the Assembly on it and include it in the Ninth Schedule”, Hemant Soren said.

Also Read: Police attach property of one of the accused in Jamshedpur’s Mango double murder case

Judgement referred by AG had no connection with bill: CM

The chief minister said that among the other judgements mentioned by the AG, Indira Sahwney Vs Union of India is related to providing reservation to backward classes. General Manager Southern Railway vs. Rangachar is concerned with providing reservation in promotion to ST/SC.

All India Exploited Employees Union (Railway) vs. Government of India is related to carry forward of the vacancy of posts reserved for ST/SC category in the coming years and State of Kerala Vs. N. M Thomas is concerned with giving promotion to ST/SC category people.

On the contrary, the purpose of the present bill is to define locality and on the basis of that, provide other benefits including employment to the local people.

Thus, the order passed in all these cases does not establish any relation with the present bill.

Attorney General’s view  

The chief minister said that we have also made a provision in this bill to include the current local related bill in the Ninth Schedule. This will provide a protective shield to this bill against judicial review. Expressing surprise at the opinion of the Attorney General, he said that he did not take this fact into consideration anywhere.

Hemant Soren said that the state government has consulted the Advocate General of Jharkhand on this subject, in which he has said that the bill passed by the Assembly can be included in the Ninth Schedule by the Parliament. After this, under Article 31(B) of the Constitution, that bill can be protected even if it is contrary to Part-3 of the Constitution or the order of any court.

Also Read: Sunil Chandra Dubey is new VC of Birsa Agriculture University