<div>The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Modi government whether it had invested any thought in demonetisation or just announced it on an impulse. A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur said the ban on high-denomination notes had shaken up the whole country. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi contended the problems would be over in 10-15 days.<br /><br />“When you framed this policy, was any mind applied? How much money will come in and how will you deal with it? How much will you reprint? Did you have all the information? Was there a plan or was it brought in on an impulse,” the bench questioned the government’s top lawyer.<br /><br />Why refuse cash <br />On information provided by senior advocates Kapil Sibal, P Chidambaram and Salman Khurshid, who represent a batch of PIL petitioners, the court wondered why banks were refusing to disburse even the Rs 24,000 the government had fixed as the individual ceiling for weekly withdrawal.<br /><br />Rohatgi, for his part, admitted the plan had run into “teething problems”, but assured the court the government was taking steps to reduce inconvenience. “Since 86% of the cash was in Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes, we could not have replaced them with new currency as that would have let the cat out of the bag,” he said. The government initially expected deposits to the tune of Rs 10-11 lakh crore, and about Rs 12 lakh crore has already come in, he explained.<br /><br />To the court’s suggestion that district cooperative banks be allowed to accept deposits after certain checks, Rohatgi contended, “These are all in the realm of fiscal policy. Will this court decide all matters of fiscal policy? This is one issue where issues of judicial review will arise.”<br /><br />Rohatgi, however, agreed that that he would respond to the suggestion on December 14, the next date of hearing. The court agreed to consider questions about the validity of the note ban and the authority of the RBI and the government to impose restrictions on withdrawal.<br /></div>
<div>The Supreme Court on Friday asked the Modi government whether it had invested any thought in demonetisation or just announced it on an impulse. A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur said the ban on high-denomination notes had shaken up the whole country. Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi contended the problems would be over in 10-15 days.<br /><br />“When you framed this policy, was any mind applied? How much money will come in and how will you deal with it? How much will you reprint? Did you have all the information? Was there a plan or was it brought in on an impulse,” the bench questioned the government’s top lawyer.<br /><br />Why refuse cash <br />On information provided by senior advocates Kapil Sibal, P Chidambaram and Salman Khurshid, who represent a batch of PIL petitioners, the court wondered why banks were refusing to disburse even the Rs 24,000 the government had fixed as the individual ceiling for weekly withdrawal.<br /><br />Rohatgi, for his part, admitted the plan had run into “teething problems”, but assured the court the government was taking steps to reduce inconvenience. “Since 86% of the cash was in Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes, we could not have replaced them with new currency as that would have let the cat out of the bag,” he said. The government initially expected deposits to the tune of Rs 10-11 lakh crore, and about Rs 12 lakh crore has already come in, he explained.<br /><br />To the court’s suggestion that district cooperative banks be allowed to accept deposits after certain checks, Rohatgi contended, “These are all in the realm of fiscal policy. Will this court decide all matters of fiscal policy? This is one issue where issues of judicial review will arise.”<br /><br />Rohatgi, however, agreed that that he would respond to the suggestion on December 14, the next date of hearing. The court agreed to consider questions about the validity of the note ban and the authority of the RBI and the government to impose restrictions on withdrawal.<br /></div>
