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

New Delhi, Jul 15 (PTI) Indian governemnt Friday 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 executive."

"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.