Enact law to stop kangaroo courts, otherwise we will frame guidelines: Madras high court to Tamil Nadu govt

CHENNAI: Holding that ‘katta panchayats’ (kangaroo courts) subvert judicial process, the Madras high court on Thursday warned the Tamil Nadu government that unless the promised special law is enacted soon, the court will frame guidelines to fill the vacuum.
The first bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M Sundar, passing further orders on a PIL against the katta panchayat menace, said: “We have made it clear to the advocate general that though we cannot issue any directions to enact any legislation, we will have little option but to step in and issue guidelines to fill in the vacuum existing in this behalf, so as to subserve the judicial system and prevent its subversion.”
The bench said it proposed to issue the guidelines on the next day of hearing, unless “we are informed that the draft legislation is ready with the intent of the government to propose it to the assembly.”
They then posted the matter to March 24 for further hearing.
It all started in 2005 when one Gopal approached the high court to direct the police to register his complaint and direct Nalla Thanneer Odai Kuppam Meenavar Grama Sabha in Thiruvottiyur to return Rs 40,000 illegally collected by the katta panchayatdars.
The other PIL was taken up by the court based on a newspaper report of a family being ostracised and imposed a fine of Rs 500 by the villagers in 2006.
After a series of orders and compliances, the government last year promised that it would bring a special law to contain the scourge. On Thursday, after advocate general sought some more time to enact a law, the bench said: “We are pained at the approach adopted by the state government in not doing anything about an issue like katta panchayat, which seeks to subvert the judicial process and, consequently, the Constitution of India. We have been receiving only assurances for more than a year despite the ground work done by the learned amicus while submitting his report.”
Pointing out that on January 22, 2016 the state’s public secretary appeared in the court and said a special law was under the ‘active consideration’ of the government, the bench said: “We find the position no different in the request made by AG today, once again, saying that a special law had to be framed.”
The bench said: “We are constrained to draw the only conclusion that the state government does not seem to be interested in drawing up a legislation on this important issue, though the advocate-general contends that the draft legislation will be ready in two months’ time.”