India's government and its courts are at loggerheads again, this time over an affirmative action policy which reserves places in private colleges for students from disadvantaged communities.

Each side has accused the other of crossing the constitutional divide between the legislature, executive and judiciary.

New Delhi stirred the standoff by criticising an August 12 court ruling overturning government policy that private, unaided professional colleges reserve a quota of places for students from disadvantaged communities.

Chief Justice R.C. Lahoti hit back Tuesday, accusing the Congress party government of attacking a judgment without understanding it and declaring the Supreme Court's strong exception to "unwanted criticism".

"If this is the attitude of the government to go after a judgment of the court without understanding it, then wind up the courts and do whatever you want," court officials quoted the judge as saying.

"Why are we told time and again by the government that it is not taking a confrontationist attitude?" Lahoti told Attorney General Milon Bannerjee.

"You must advise the government to exercise self-restraint. If that is your attitude then let us do our duty and you continue doing yours."

The comments sparked uproar in parliament Wednesday with angry MPs claiming the country's highest court was interfering in the workings of the legislature and executive.

"Members are deeply distressed across political lines because of the remarks that have been because they are uncalled for and extremely unfortunate," communist leader Gurudas Dasgupta said.

"Never before such caustic remarks have been made... It's a new thing. The parliament must be allowed to do its job and the judiciary must do its job," he said as Speaker Somnath Chatterjee tried to calm tempers in the 545-seat elected lower house.

In its August 12 ruling, a seven-judge Supreme Court bench headed by Lahoti had said the state was not entitled to enforce reservation of places in private colleges.

"The state cannot insist that private educational institutions, which receive no aid from the state, implement state policy on reservation while granting admission on lesser percentage of marks, that is, on any criteria except merit," it ruled.

Shortly after Tuesday's comments by Lahoti, key political parties held a scheduled meeting in New Delhi during which they set up a panel to devise a legal remedy to get round the court's August 12 ruling.

Human Resource Development Minister Arjun Singh said the committee would attempt to frame a law "providing social justice, eliminating commercialism of education and protecting minority rights".

The committee, he added, would even consider the possibility of amending the constitution if this was necessary.

The tiff is not the first time the government and the independent judiciary have drawn swords. In 1951 a succession of courts overturned land reforms measures being introduced by then prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, whose Congress government responded to the setback by amending the constitution to ensure the measures were pushed through.

The Supreme Court in 1970 infuriated Nehru's daughter and then premier Indira Gandhi by invalidating two of her pet projects, nationalisation of banks and abolition of privy purses.

She, too, introduced constitutional changes which were later overturned by the courts.

In 1975, the Allahabad High Court annulled Gandhi's re-election from Rae Bareli constituency, setting off a chain of responses that culminated in her declaring a state of emergency.

More recently, Speaker Chatterjee earlier this year took exception to the Supreme Court laying down norms for a test of party strength in the assembly of Jharkand state, saying it was an intrusion into the sphere of the legislature.

Copyright © 2005 Agence France Presse