The Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court issued a notice on Friday to Chief Minister Mayawati and PWD Minister Naseemuddin Siddiqui,seeking resumption of proceedings against them in the Taj Heritage Corridor case. Hearing a petition filed by Mahoba residents Kamlesh Verma and Anupma Singh,a Bench comprising Justices Pradeep Kant and Shabihul Husnain observed that the prima facie evidence in the case is worth arguable and asked the duo to file their replies within six weeks. While the PIL challenges the dropping of the case against the BSP chief and her cabinet colleague,it also questions the role of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in failing to challenge the special judges order that relieved the accused. Reacting to the court notice,BSP general secretary Satish Chandra Mishra said the government will file a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court. Earlier,the government had filed three petitions in the apex court on this issue but they were all dismissed. It is not proper to get an order from the High Court when the apex court has already decided on the case, he said. The Taj Heritage Corridor scam worth Rs 175 crore was exposed in 2003. The then BSP-BJP coalition government,led by Mayawati,had drawn a grand plan of constructing a corridor around the Taj Mahal and other monuments in Agra for the convenience of the tourist. The award for the construction of the corridor was given to the National Building Construction Corporation. Following a PIL in Supreme Court,in July 2003,the apex court directed the CBI to conduct an inquiry and file the status report within two weeks. The CBI conducted the inquiry and prime facie charges of corruption,violation of environment and forest law were upheld. Based on the CBI report,the Supreme Court asked the Central investigation agency to conduct a detailed probe into the matter. The CBI in its report said Rs 74 crore were spent though no actual civil construction was done and only stone boulders were dumped at the site. Findings of the CBI led to a political furor and Mayawati resigned from the office on August 23,2007. Later,the CBI chargesheeted Mayawati,the then minister for environment Naseemuddin siddiqui,the then principal secretary environment RK Sharma and Rajendra Prasad,under secretary environment. The CBI in 2007 filed the chargesheet in the Special Court in Lucknow. The CBI then approached the Governor TV Rajeswar in same year seeking sanction for the prosecution of Mayawati. By that time Mayawati had again taken over as the chief minister of UP on May 13,2007. The state governor rejected the plea of the CBI. The PIL,which was filed in Allahabad High Court on February 20,2008,wanted to know why the agency after drawing a chargesheet sought Governors sanction to prosecute Mayawati. The petitioner cited the case of Prakash Singh Badal versus state of Punjab in 2007,whereby the Supreme Court had stated that in cases of forgery and cheating,no sanction is needed,irrespective of whether it is against a public servant because it does not come under the discharge of official duty. The state,however,contended that the Supreme Court ruling in one particular case cannot be treated as a general law. According to the law,if a public servant is charged under any section of the IPC,it is mandatory for the investigating agency to seek sanction from the competent authority,which is also the appointing authority,under Section 197 of Criminal Procedure Code. Besides,if the public servant is facing charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act,sanction of the competent authority is required under Section 19 of the Act. The petitioner lawyer Rohit Tripathi- said Mayawati was facing charges under Sections 420,467,468 and 471 and the court had issued notices after argument.
