New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to consider individual cases seeking acceptance of demonetised currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 denominations. A bench comprising BR Gavai and Vikram Nath, however, allowed the individual petitioners to approach the government with a representation.
The top court directed the government to decide the representation and consider the individual grievances, if made, within a period of 12 weeks. "After the judgement of the constitution bench, we do not find it will be permissible for us to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution in individual cases to accept demonetised currency notes," the bench said.
It also clarified that in the event any of the petitioners are not satisfied with the action by the Union of India, they would be at liberty to approach the high court concerned. In a majority verdict, the top court had upheld the government's 2016 decision to demonetise the currency notes of Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 denominations.
A five-judge Constitution bench had said the Centre's decision-making process could not have been flawed as there was consultation between the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Union government. The court had said the notification dated November 8, 2016, which announced the decision to scrap the high-value currency notes, cannot be said to be unreasonable and struck down on the ground of decision-making process.
Earlier, a plea was filed seeking a review of the judgement that upheld the Centre's 2016 decision to demonetise Rs 1,000 and Rs 500 currency notes was filed in the Supreme Court on Sunday. A five-judge Constitution bench, in a 4:1 majority verdict, on January 2 had given its stamp of approval, saying the decision-making process was neither flawed nor hasty.
The review plea was filed by lawyer ML Sharma, one of the 58 petitioners who had moved the top court challenging the demonetisation exercise announced on November 8, 2016. Sharma, in his review plea, contended that the bench did not consider his written arguments in its verdict on the batch of pleas which led to serious injustice and miscarriage of justice. (PTI)
