Shambhu Border Closure: Haryana’s Plea in Supreme Court Against HC Order<\/strong><\/p>\n

On July 22, the Supreme Court will hear Haryana’s plea against the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s July 10 order directing the state to open the Shambhu border within a week. Haryana’s appeal, filed by advocate Akshay Amritanshu, argues that the High Court’s decision overlooked the state’s concerns about potential law and order issues, threats to life and property, and the presence of agitators on the National Highway.<\/p>\n

The plea highlights the following points:<\/p>\n

Law and Order: Haryana emphasized its responsibility to assess ground realities and potential threats, asserting that the High Court’s order disregarded these concerns.
\nAgitators’ Presence: The state noted that despite acknowledging the inconvenience caused by the border closure, the High Court’s order recorded the continued presence of 400 to 500 trolleys, 50 to 60 vehicles, and around 500 agitators at the site.
\nState’s Authority: The plea stresses that maintaining law and order is a state subject under the Constitution, and the state must be allowed to manage threats and peace breaches effectively.
\nA Supreme Court bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan has agreed to list Haryana’s Special Leave Petition (SLP) for hearing on July 22.<\/p>\n

Background:
\nThe Shambhu border<\/a> <\/strong>has been closed since February 13 due to several farmer unions from Punjab marching towards Delhi to demand various issues, including a legal guarantee of Minimum Support Price (MSP) for crops. In response, the Haryana government erected barricades on the Ambala-New Delhi national highway to prevent the farmers from reaching the national capital.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Shambhu Border Closure: Haryana’s Plea in Supreme Court Against HC Order On July 22, the Supreme Court will hear Haryana’s plea against the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s July 10 order directing the state to open the Shambhu border within a week. Haryana’s appeal, filed by advocate Akshay Amritanshu, argues that the High Court’s decision … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3724,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rank_math_lock_modified_date":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3723","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-national-news"],"yoast_head":"\n