JUSTICE THOMAS COMMITTEE
Subject: Constitution of the Justice Thomas Committee to suggest
modalities for making the enforcement of the provisions of the
Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 more
effective and useful.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide an Order dated 18.6.2007 in
the matter of W.P.(Crl) No.77/2007, appointed a Committee to examine as
to the modalities to be adopted to make the Prevention of Damage to Public
Property Act, 1984 more effective and also to suggest suitable changes or
alterations which can make the statue more meaningful. The composition of
the Committee is as under :-
Justice K.T.Thomas, former Judge of the
Supreme Court of India. …… Chairman
Mr.K.Parasaran, Senior Member of the
legal profession …… Member
Mr.R.K.Raghavan, ex Director,CBI …… Member
Mr.G.E.Vahanvati, Solicitor General
Of India …… Member
Secretary ,Ministry of Law & Justice …… Member
Smt.Anita Chaudhary, Addl.Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs …… Member
Mr.Rajeev Dhavan, …… Member
Amicus Curiae
Mr.G.E.Vahanvati, Solicitor General of India is also the convener to
cooperate the functioning of the Committee. The Ministry of Home Affairs
is responsible for coordination of the functioning of the Committee.
The Committee has already met twice on 31st July, 2007 and 11th September,
2007 at New Delhi.
MOST IMMEDIATE
SUPREME COURT MATTER
No.24013/69/2007-CSR.II (Pt.III)
MADHUKAR GUPTA
HOME SECRETARY
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
North Block,
New Delhi.
12th September,2007.
Dear Chief Secretary,
This is with reference to letter dated 14th August, 2007 from Shri G.E.Vahanvati,
Solicitor General of India regarding Justice Thomas Committee appointed by the
Supreme Court of India to examine the modalities to be adopted to make the
Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 more effective and also to suggest
suitable changes/alterations to make the study more meaningful. Despite the
Supreme Court issuing Notice to all State Governments/UTs to furnish information of
the cases, which were tried under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act,
1984, the number of cases where conviction was recorded and fine realized, the
requisite information has not been forthcoming from the States. The information was
to be supplied to the Committee within three weeks of the issue of Notice by the
Supreme Court. The views of the State Governments and the Union Territories about
steps that could be taken to make the Act more meaningful were also required to be
provided to the Committee during the said period of three weeks.
2. The delay in furnishing the information by the State Governments has
been viewed with great displeasure by the Committee when it met for the second time
on 11th September, 2007 and the Committee desired that the States/UTs may be
advised to respond quickly in the matter in compliance with the directions of the
Supreme Court, so that the inputs given by the States can be taken up for further
necessary action/steps in the matter by the Committee in its next meeting which is
likely to be held soon.
3. I, therefore, request you to kindly look into the matter personally and
ensure that the desired information and the views of the State Government are
sent to MHA immediately and positively within the next ten days.
With regards,
Yours sincerely,
(Madhukar Gupta)
Chief Secretaries, All State Government/UTs.
