Recalling that in 1998 the Supreme Court had clearly upheld the ruling of a full bench of the Kerala High Court which had said that calling or enforcing a bandh was illegal and unconstitutional, the bench regretted that orders of the courts were being violated.

“We have come to this stage in the country that everything has to be monitored, hammered or directed by courts. Even orders of the Supreme Court are not observed, what to talk of the High Courts. Ninety-nine per cent of the High Court orders are not complied,” the bench said.

The bench rejected arguments of senior counsel Altaf Ahmed and A K Ganguly appearing for Tamil Nadu and the DMK that the October 1 protest programme was not a bandh call but a “hartal”.

“If it is a bandh, then it is a breakdown of the Constitutional machinery.Your own resolution says that the programme on October 1 is intended to ensure complete cessation of all activities, then how can you say it is not a bandh?,” the bench asked the Tamil Nadu counsel.

The bench brushed aside the claims of the state and the DMK that what was essentially intended was a public meeting.

“Where is the public meeting? You show us. Your resolution say it is cessation of all activities and work. You want to show your popularity. Why do you want to close all educational institutions and commercial activities? Where will you then find people for your meetings?” the bench said.

“Your protest is against whom? The project, Central government or against this court?” the bench asked to which the counsel claimed that the protest was for seeking early implementation of the project.

... contd.