Kolkata, Sep 9 (IANS): As a Supreme Court division bench of Chief Justice UU Lalit, on Friday stayed the hearing on a public interest litigation (PIL) at the Calcutta High Court on the assets of 19 Trinamool Congress leaders including seven ministers in the West Bengal government, political mudslinging started in the state. The matter will now be heard in the apex court which will decide on the admissibility of the PIL.
Trinamool Congress leaders have expressed satisfaction over the Supreme Court decision. Forest minister Jyotipriyo Mullick said that this verdict is a moral victory for them and a slap on the face of the individual who filed the PIL with ulterior political motives. "We have full faith in the judicial system of the country. Some wanted to malign the Trinamool Congress and the chief minister, Mamata Banerjee. The BJP is behind this conspiracy," he said.
State BJP spokesman Samik Bhattacharya said that the Supreme Court has only stayed the petition and not dismissed it as yet. "Let us wait till the end. At the same time, we want to say that politics is always not fought in the court. It is fought on the streets," Bhattacharya added.
Biplob Chowdhury, who filed the PIL, said that his next course of action will be decided after he gets the copy of the apex court order. "However, our fight will be on in this matter since this exorbitant increase in the assets and property value of a section of the politicians has become a disease for the society," he said.
The Supreme Court's decision to stay the hearing has brought relief for the Trinamool Congress leaders on another count. The division bench of the Calcutta High Court's Chief Justice, Prakash Srivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj while admitting the PIL earlier directed the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to be a party to the PIL. Three ministers named in the PIL -- urban development & municipal affairs minister Firhad Hakim, forest minister Jyotipriyo Mullick and the state corporations department minister Arup Ray -- filed a review petition appealing to the division bench to reconsider its decision on making ED a party in the matter.