The Supreme Court on Wednesday again stressed the Centre’s failure to break the deadlock with the protesting farmers but conceded the government’s plea to adjourn till Monday the hearing of a petition challenging the new farm laws’ constitutionality.
Attorney-general K.K. Venugopal and solicitor-general Tushar Mehta had urged the bench not to take the matter up on Friday — as the court had suggested — claiming there were chances of a settlement by then.
The next round of talks — the eighth — is scheduled on Friday. The farmers want the three new farm laws repealed.
“There is absolutely no improvement in the situation,” the bench of Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde and Justices A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian had earlier observed, referring to the six-week-old siege of Delhi’s borders by agitating farmers.
The bench was dealing with a public interest petition moved by advocate M.L. Sharma challenging a 1954 amendment to the Constitution that put key agriculture-related issues on the concurrent list. This had allowed the Centre to enact the new farm laws.
Agriculture and marketing per se are on the state list while matters like trade and commerce in — and production, supply and distribution of — foodstuff are on the concurrent list.
A protester at the Singhu border Wednesday PTI
Both the Centre and the states can enact laws on subjects on the concurrent list. However, in case of a conflict, a central law prevails over a state law.
Justice Bobde said that since multiple petitions on the farmers’ agitation had already been filed before the court, it would club all of them with Sharma’s and hear them on Friday.
Mehta tried to dissuade the court, saying: “We are discussing the issue with the farmers….”
Venugopal backed him, saying: “There is a good chance that parties may come to some conclusion in the near future.”
He requested that no orders be passed on the matter so the talks could continue. He added that the filing of a response by the Centre “could foreclose avenues of negotiations under way between farmers and the Centre”.
Volunteers prepare rotis for protesting farmers on Wednesday Prem Singh
Justice Bobde said: “We understand the situation. We want to encourage the talks.We will keep matter on Monday and will adjourn if you say so.”
However, the bench issued a notice to the Centre on Sharma’s petition. It added that Sharma had a habit of filing “startling petitions”.
Venugopal said the challenge appeared a futile exercise as the states had for the past 75 years had no objection to agriculture-related issues being on the concurrent list.
“Mr Sharma feels the Centre and the states are in collusion for the last 75 years,” Justice Bobde said.
Some of the petitions filed in the apex court on the farmers’ agitation seek quashing of the new farm laws, while others seek eviction of the protesters from Delhi’s borders on the ground of hardship to residents and commuters.
At the last hearing, the bench had chastised the Centre for its failure to resolve the dispute and proposed to form a high-level committee with all stakeholders to negotiate a settlement.