Govt moves SC for recall of order for setting up SIT on black money New Delhi, Jul 15 (PTI)

Govt moves SC for recall of order for setting up SIT on black money

New Delhi, Jul 15 (PTI)

Governemnt today moved the Supreme Court seeking "recall" and ''modification'' of its order for setting up a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising its retired judges to take over the probe into all black money cases contending it has ventured into the domain of the executive.

The application, which said the SIT was formed without being prayed, raised ten main grounds among others for recall of the order in which it has been pulled up for the "laggardly pace" in investigations into the issue of black money stashed abroad. The application, filed through the Revenue Secretary, contended the July 4 order appointing former judges - Justices B P Jeevan Reddy and M B Shah as chairman and vice-chairman of SIT was "without jurisdiction" and against the well- established doctrine of seperation of power. Maintaining that a bench of justices B Sudershan Reddy (since retired) and S S Nijjar has impinged upon the domain entrusted to the executive, it said the order is "contrary to the settled legal princple that the function of the court is to see that the lawful authority is duly exercised by the executive but not to take over itself the task entrusted to the exe. "It impinges upon the well setttled princple that courts do not interfere with the economic policy which is the domain of the Executive and that it is not the function of the court to sit in judgement over matters of ecnomic policy, which must necessarily be left to the expert bodies," it said. The government argued courts are neither concerned with the judicial review of the economic policy nor it was required for them to substitute their views on matters which falls within the ambit of the executive. "That the judicial review is not concerned with the matters of economic policy as the courts do not substitute their views and judgement for that of the executive as regards the matters which fall within the domain/province of the executive. It is respectfully submitted that the courts do not supplant the views of experts by its own views," the application said. While assailing the order for setting up of SIT and making adverse remarks, the government contended the direction will eliminate and denude the constitutional responsibility of the executive. "That the said order has the effect of completely eliminating the role and denuding the constitutional responsibility of the executive which itself is answerable to Parliament and it is further respectfully submitted that it directly interferes with the functions and obligations of the executive, more particularly, since it is ordered that SIT will report directly to the Supreme Court, therefore excluding the executive and consequently Parliament also," it said. The governemnt said the court should have exercised "judicial self restraint" as it was handling the matter concerning the tax and economic policies. "The order impinges upon the principle that in matters of utilities, tax and economic policy, legislation and regulation cases, the court exercises judicial self restraint if not judicial deference to the acts of the executive since the executive has obligations and responsibilities both constitutionally and statutorily," the application said. The government expressed its displeasure over the discussion of economic theories and the "wide-ranging criticism of the State" in the first 20 paras of the order saying "it is uncalled for, unjustified and made without any discussion in court or material therefore." The application said the apex court has passed the directions without "completely" hearing Centre's stand and many of the observations proceed on an incorrect factual basis and comments were made against entities and persons who were not even parties to the petition and as such runs contrary to the principles of natural justice. "The observations rendered in the said order, it is respectfully submitted, have been expressed in absence of any contention and/or arguments raised, urged, heard and debated in court," the application said. "To the extent the order proceeds on admission, concession, statements and acknowledgements attributed to the counsel appearing for Union of India, it is humbly and respectfully pointed out that such concession, statements and acknowledgements do not appear to have been made and therefore, the order proceeds on incorrect factual basis," it said. The government also maintained that the order which spoke about the treaty making power of sovereign countries impinges upon the legal and constitutional principles that such treaties are not subject to review of courts.