Thursday, February 25, 2010

Why the fetish for statues, SC asks Maya govt

What About Teen Murti, Retorts BSP

Dhananjay Mahapatra | TNN

New Delhi: In what could trip UP chief minister Mayawati’s plans to construct grandiose stone images of herself, BSP founder Kanshi Ram and Dalit icon B R Ambedkar, the Supreme Court on Monday sought a response from the leader on a PIL alleging a massive waste of public money.
The Supreme Court has indicated that it might have some tough questions for the Mayawati government even as the BSP leader’s aide Satish Mishra, who also pleaded her case in court, hit back claiming that monuments and memorials to upper caste leaders, like Teen Murti, never seemed to generate the same outrage.
The BSP argued that the developmental work of the Mayawati government never attracted any attention while the monuments were selectively highlighted. The BSP’s accusation of a political agenda and bias did not deter the SC from asking for some responses while it explained that it was not passing any sort of interim order.
With the PIL arguing that public funds could be better utilised to help UP’s poor, the SC seemed to pose a “why the fetish for your own statues” query to the Mayawati government with a Bench comprising Justices Dalveer Bhandari and A K Ganguly quoting from the petition filed by advocates Ravi Kant and Sukumar. The PIL alleges that spending over Rs 1,200 crore on statues was irresponsible when UP had the largest population — 59 million — of people below the poverty line.
Appearing for the state, Mishra tried to convince the Bench that the PIL was politically motivated. He even objected to a large portion of the petitioner’s allegations being quoted in the order.
BUILDER BEHENJI
5.5 lakh metric tonnes of pink and red sandstone being ferried from Rajasthan and Mirzapur to Lucknow
46 statues of Mayawati, Kanshi Ram and other Dalit leaders to be built, also 60 elephants in chunar stone
Memorials to cover some 413 acres of prime land in Lucknow
Construction in Lucknow alone to cost Rs 2,681cr , plus Rs 270cr in maintenance ‘Questions raised only in case of Dalit memorials’
New Delhi: BSP leader Mayawati’s aide Satish Mishra, who pleaded the UP CM’s case in court, said memorials for other leaders seldom raised an eyebrow, except when they were meant for a Dalit icon. He sought to buttress his argument by citing the example of the sprawling Teen Murti Bhawan in Delhi, which is a memorial for the first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru.
“We would like the court also to focus on larger issues like Teen Murti Bhawan which at present would be worth more than Rs 3,000 crore. It hurts when no one questions such memorials. But, if a memorial for Dr Ambedkar is built, then objections are raised,” he said after the court issued notices. Earlier, senior advocate U U Lalit said the PIL petitioners had no connection with UP and that all the expenditure on the statues and renovation of parks had been duly sanctioned by the assembly and that nothing was being done without proper sanction.
When the court said it has not issued any interim order but was merely seeking response of the state government, Mishra said: “We will bring all the larger issues before the court and it should deal with them.” Given the tone of arguments, Mayawati government is sure to list out the number of memorials for upper caste leaders and draw a contrast with the smaller numbers dedicated to Dalit leaders.

Petition challenges UP Govt stand on statues in SC

Updated on Monday, August 24, 2009, 19:09 IST Tags:Uttar Pradesh, statue erection, Kanshi Ram, Mayawati

E-Mail

New Delhi: Uttar Pradesh government's stand that statues of Chief Minister Mayawati was installed to fulfil the wishes of her mentor Kanshi Ram was on Monday opposed in the Supreme Court on the ground that tax payers money cannot be used for implementing the wish of a private person.

"They (state government) are implementing the will of a private person. They have said it in the affidavit. Can tax payers money be used for fulfiling the Will of a private party?" the advocates, who have filed the PIL on the issue, contended before a Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices P Sathasivam and B S Chauhan.

The advocates said Rs 5000 crore of public money cannot be allowed to be misused for glorifying Mayawati. They said that during the pendency of the petition two more statues of the BSP supremo had been installed in a park in Noida, adjoining Delhi.

The affidavit filed by Uttar Pradesh government has said Mayawati's statues were installed only to fulfil the wishes of Kanshi Ram who willed that wherever his statues were installed, the statues of Mayawati, "his only heir, must also be installed."

Senior advocates Harish Salve and S C Mishra, appearing for the state government, said the PIL was not maintainable and the budgetary allocation for the projects were made after discussion in the Assembly.

"The House had passed the resolution. There is no violation of law," they said.

The PIL filed by advocates Ravi Kant and Sukumar has accused Uttar Pradesh government of misusing public funds for the installation of statues of Mayawati, Kanshi Ram, other Dalit leaders and that of elephants-- BSP's election symbol-- at parks in Lucknow and Noida.

Responding to the notice issued to it, the state government has in an affidavit said it is a wrong notion that only statues of dead persons can be installed.

The state government expressed dismay over the manner in which the hype is being created over installation of statues of Mayawati and quoted examples of superstar Amitabh Bachchan and former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee whose statues were erected.

"It is a wrong notion that only statues of dead persons can be installed. There is no dearth of examples, whether in the country or abroad, about statues of living persons. In the Indian context, one can easily refer to A B Vajpayee Institute of Technology and Management, Gwalior, and Amitabh Bachchan Institute at Saifai, Etawah," the state government said in an affidavit.

View article on single page

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

SC asks EC to decide if elephant statues in UP are poll symbols

PTI, Feb 22, 2010, 02.46pm IST

SC asks EC to decide if statues in UP are poll symbols

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Election Commission to decide whether the installation of statues of elephants at the cost of the state exchequer by the Mayawati government in Lucknow and Noida amounts to the installation of election symbol of the party.

A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan granted three months to the Election Commission to decide the issue.

The bench was hearing a PIL filed by two advocates Ravi Kant and Sukumar, who have accused the UP government of misusing public money for the installation of statues of the Dalit leaders including Mayawati and party symbol, elephant at various places in the state.

Kant had submitted before the bench that the information gathered through an RTI disclosed that 60 statues of elephants were being installed by Uttar Pradesh government at a cost of Rs 52.20 crore at public places by utilising state funds.

The particular issue of election symbol was referred to the Election Commission as the petitioners have also made a representation before the Commission.

The PIL had sought a direction to restrain Mayawati from installing her statues and those of elephants at public places with public funds and demanded a CBI probe into the misuse of state exchequer.

The advocate had claimed the total money used by Mayawati from the state budget for 2008-09 and 2009-10 for such projects was to the tune of Rs 2,000 crore.

THE HINDU

Court asks EC to decide U.P. statue issue J. Venkatesan

Whether installation of statues of elephants amounts to putting up BSP’s election symbol

Three-judge bench of the Supreme Court gives three months’ time to poll panel
Court is hearing a PIL accusing Uttar Pradesh Government of misusing public money

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Election Commission to decide whether the installation of statues of elephants by the Mayawati Government in Lucknow and Noida near the national Capital would amount to installation of BSP’s election symbol.

A three-judge Bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan, Justice Deepak Verma and Justice B.S. Chauhan granted three months time to the Commission to dispose of the petition filed by advocates Ravi Kant and Sukumar questioning the installation of elephants being the party symbol with tax payers money.

Senior counsel for BSP S.C. Mishra, who is also the party General Secretary submitted: “We have given reply to the Election Commission that the elephants installed in parks are not the election symbol of the party but only a welcome symbol. Even in the North Block and South Block, Lok Sabha and Rashtrapathi Bhavan, there are elephants statues. Statues of elephants are also found in temples and the distinction is quite clear.” He said the State Legislature had accounted for every rupee spent on statues and erection of elephants.

Commission’s Counsel Meenakshi Arora, said the Commission was not in favour of pre-judging the issue and wanted to wait till the Supreme Court decided the matter.

The Bench was hearing a PIL filed by the two advocates accusing the Uttar Pradesh Government of misusing public money for installation of statues of the Dalit leaders, including Ms. Mayawati and the party symbol elephant at various places in the State.”

Mr. Kant submitted that 60 statues of elephants were being installed by Uttar Pradesh Government at a cost of Rs 52.20 crore at public places by utilising State funds. Senior counsel Harish Salve, appearing for the State raised the maintainability of the PIL.

However, the bench said the question could be considered after the Election Commission decided the issued.

In the petition, it was alleged that the State had shown utter disregard to the constitutional mandate while deciding to spent huge money on installing a very large number of statues.

According to the petitioners, the funds need to be used for the welfare and development of people and particularly of the weaker sections of the society.

EC asked to decide if elephant statues in UP are poll symbols

Posted by 233news.com February - 22 - 2010

The Supreme Court on Monday put the onus on the Election Commission to decide whether installation of statues of elephants at the cost of the state exchequer by Uttar Pradesh government in Lucknow and Noida amounts to putting up of BSP’s election symbol.

A Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices Deepak Verma and B S Chauhan granted three months to the Election Commission to decide the issue even as Uttar Pradesh government contended that the statues of elephants are not the election symbol of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), but a welcome symbol.

“We have given reply to the Election Commission that the elephants installed in parks are not the election symbol of the party as alleged, but a welcome symbol.

“Even in the North Block and South Block here, You have elephants statues,” senior advocate and Mayawati’s close aide S C Mishra told the Bench. Mishra, who is the General Secretary of BSP and appearing along with senior advocate Harish Salve for Uttar Pradesh government, said statues of elephants are also found in temples and “the distinction is quite clear”.

The bench was hearing a PIL filed by two advocates Ravi and Sukumar who have accused the UP government of misusing public money for installation of statues of the Dalit leaders, including Mayawati, and the party symbol elephant at various places in the state.

The Bench said “we have to look what is the solution.

More money will be spent for removing the statues. Who will give the mone? From where the money will come?”

Mayawati's elephant statues a poll symbol?

PTI

First Published : 22 Feb 2010 06:59:09 PM IST

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court today asked the Election Commission to decide whether the installation of statues of elephants at the cost of the state exchequer by the Mayawati government in Lucknow and Noida amounts to the installation of election symbol of the party.A bench headed by Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan granted three months to the Election Commission to decide the issue.The bench was hearing a PIL filed by two advocates Ravi ant and Sukumar, who have accused the UP government of misusing public money for the installation of statues of the Dalit leaders including Mayawati and party symbol, elephant at various places in the state.Kant had submitted before the bench that the information gathered through an RTI disclosed that 60 statues of elephants were being installed by Uttar Pradesh government at a cost of Rs 52.20 crore at public places by utilising state funds.The particular issue of election symbol was referred to the Election Commission as the petitioners have also made a representation before the Commission.The PIL had sought a direction to restrain Mayawati from installing her statues and those of elephants at public places with public funds and demanded a CBI probe into the misuse of state exchequer.The advocate had claimed the total money used by Mayawati from the state budget for 2008-09 and 2009-10 for such projects was to the tune of Rs.2,000 crore.

SC asks EC to decide on Mayawati statues

Posted in Uncategorized by lawreports on February 23, 2010

ABRAHAM THOMAS IN THE PIONEER

SC asked Election Commission to decide within hree months a petition against Mayawati’s statues being in violation of model code of conduct. The SC was hearing a PIL by advocate Ravi Kant, who had even approached the EC complaining that the statue of elephant being BSP symbol was a malpractice.The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Election Commission to decide in three months the contentious issue concerning statues of Mayawati and those of her party symbol elephant — the latter alleged to be violative of the model code of conduct.

Hearing a PIL on the issue, a bench of Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan, Justices Deepak Verma and BS Chauhan decided to continue hearing of the petition filed by advocate Ravi Kant even after the Commission decides the issue.

Interestingly, the peti- tioner before the Supreme Court has also represented before the Election Commission saying the statues and memo- rials were violative of the model code of c o n d u c t . According to he complaint filed by advocates Ravi K ant and Sukumar, they said construc- tions carried out by the Mayawati Government vio- lated an April 1, 2009 notifi- cation issued by the poll panel. The notification expressly prohibited display of image or photograph of political functionaries in any form in Government offices or public places.

With the elephant being the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) symbol and the statue of Mayawati who herself would contest the elections in the coming State Assembly polls, the petition said, “The Bahujan Samaj Party and the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh have violated the orders of the Election Commission by installing per- manent structures of the election symbol replica of BSP and constructing several statues of the Chief Minister in public places in Lucknow and Noida. These structures will severely vio- late the Model Code of Conduct during elections.”

According to the infor- mation collected by the com- plainants, a total of 60 ele- phant statues would be installed in the State at a total cost of Rs 52.20 crore. Besides, a sum of Rs 1,940 crore was spent by Mayawati for constructing her statues in several parts of the State. Citing grounds for EC to interfere, the petition stated, “The statues have been put up in vantage point to ensure that the supremacy and fear of the power of the BSP is conveyed to the voter” in a manner to influence them and destroy fair play.

Appearing for the BSP , senior advocate SC Mishra informed the court that elephant should not be linked with BSP alone, as it has his- torical and cultural connota- tions in the country. Referring to elephant being a symbol of welcome, he argued the struc- ture was merely a sign of wel- coming people to UP . But the bench wondered, “How can we distinguish between welcome symbols and BSP symbols.”

Mishra even objected to the petitioner’s intention to remain slow as two years have already elapsed since the pro- ject was undertaken. To this, the bench reacted, “He was not aware what was behind the wheel. As soon as he came to know he approached the court.” For the State Government, senior advocate Harish Salve suggested that the objection with regard to the statues being a waste of public money could be heard by the court while the other objection regarding election symbol be taken up by the Commission. But the bench preferred to wait for the Commission’s order follow- ing which it decided to hear both the objections together.