Friends, you must be aware of a section of farmers protesting at the Delhi borders against the farm bills passed by the central government for the past 40-odd days.
They had several rounds of talks with the central government, but nothing materialized. The government was adamant about not going back on the farm bills and had suggested the protestors to move the Supreme Court to get the bills repealed.
Therefore, they approached the Supreme Court.
Today, the Supreme Court expressed their disappointment with the manner in which negotiations are going on between the central government and farmers over the newly-enacted agriculture laws.
The Supreme Court also apex the Centre if the contentious legislation can be put on hold for some time.
The CJI warned that if the Central government does not want to keep the three laws in abeyance, the court will put a stay on their implementation.
But, does the Supreme Court has the right to put a stay on its implementation?
Yes, it can. But, only when the court finds that it violates fundamental rights or constitutional schemes. The laws however violate neither of the premises. Therefore, it cannot repeal the laws.
And therefore, the court proposed to pass an order to facilitate the solution to the farm laws problem through a committee to be appointed by it, and also proposed to hold the implementation of the legislations till further orders.
These directions have pushed the protesting farmers on the backfoot. Because, they were rejecting the idea of forming the panel during their several rounds of talks with the government, which led them to move the apex court.
The so-called farmers who are protesting are in a fix. Their problem is back to square one. Now, it will be mandatory on their part to obey the proposal of forming a panel for negotiation. Can they disobey the supreme court? If they do, then their agitation dies a natural death.
बहुत बढिया