Shambhu border: Supreme Court proposes forming of panel to look into demands of farmers
The farmers demand a legal guarantee of minimum support price (MSP) for crops among other things.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday proposed setting up a committee to look into the various demands of farmers, including a legal guarantee of minimum support price (MSP) for crops.
The court directed the Central government and state governments of Haryana and Punjab to suggest individuals who can be included in the committee, while ordering a status quo for a week on the Shambhu border near Ambala, where farmers have been camping since February 13.
The court was hearing a petition filed by the Haryana government against the July 10 order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court directing the state government to open the Punjab-Haryana Shambhu border within a week.
The border has remained closed since February 13, when several farmer unions from Punjab began their march towards Delhi in support of various demands, including a legal guarantee of MSP for crops.
The Haryana government set up barricades on the Ambala-New Delhi national highway to stop the farmers' march to the national capital. Since then, the farmers have been camping at the Shambhu border.
Also Read | Shambhu border closure: What Haryana told Supreme Court in plea against HC order
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of the Haryana government, submitted that over 500-600 tanks, which he said have been modified as "armoured tanks," are stationed at Shambhu Border. He argued that a law-and-order situation may arise if they are allowed to enter the capital, according to Live Law.
The court, however, sought to know whether the farmers can be permitted to travel without their tractors and trolleys.
"You (Haryana government) need to make some effort, after all, you have to reach out to the farmers. Why would they otherwise need to come to Delhi?" the court asked.
Also Read | 'Open Shambhu border, regulate traffic': Supreme Court to Haryana govt
The court also noted that there appears to be a "trust deficit" between the government and the protesting farmers.
"Have you taken any initiative to negotiate with the farmers? Your ministers might go to the farmers without realising the local issues. There is a trust deficit. Why don't you have some neutral umpires? There have to be confidence-building measures," it observed, according to Live Law.