Srinagar: Expressing displeasure at the “consistent ignoring of the court orders with disdain” by the executive machinery of Jammu & Kashmir, and Ladakh, the High Court has ordered the top bureaucracy of the Union territories to personally appear before the court to explain their position on the matter.
The court said that 6000 orders have been passed by it ending in contempt petitions with some of them lingering on for decades.
“This reflects a shocking scenario where the Executive is ignoring the orders passed by this court consistently with utter disdain, cocky that this court shall take no measures imperilling their liberty for their disobedience,” remarked Justices Atul Sreedharan and Javed Iqbal.
The remarks were made while adjudicating the case of Sheikh Mohammad Hussain and others Vs Atal Dulloo, J&K Chief Secretary; Santosh Singh, Secretary Finance, and Bopinder Singh, Secretary PWD.
The court had passed its orders in the case in August 2023 directing the government to grant higher pay to chief engineers than the superintending engineers.
However, the order is yet to be complied with as the government has preferred an appeal against it this June in the Supreme Court of India. The concerned officers cited dissimilar “excuses” for filing the appeal so late.
“From the manner in which the Union Territory government has conducted itself, it is clear that there is an absolute lack of sincerity of purpose on its part to comply with the order passed by this court. It reflects a sorry state of affairs that exists in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir with regard to judicial proceedings and judicial orders,” observed Justices Atul Sreedharan and Javed Iqbal.
The bench recorded that there are at least 6000 litigants in the UT of Jammu and Kashmir who despite having orders in their favour are unable to savour the benefit of these orders.
In some cases, there may be more than one petitioner in a contempt petition which would raise the number of persons awaiting the benefit of this court’s orders, phenomenally above 6000.
“A few of these contempt matters are pending between ten to fifteen years and the cases pending between one to five years are the ones that run into thousands and have reduced the justice dispensation system in the UT to a cruel joke,” it said.
The bench said that a contempt case must be concluded ideally in three to five hearings in which the order is complied with. Otherwise, there is no need to comply with it as the superior court or the larger bench has stayed or set aside the principal order itself, or the contemnor is punished in accordance with law.
“This reflects a shocking scenario where the Executive is ignoring the orders passed by this court consistently with utter disdain, cocky that this court shall take no measures imperilling their liberty for their disobedience,” said the court.
This milieu, the court said, has come to exist on account of the excessive latitude being shown by the court to maintain a harmonious relationship between the judiciary and the executive.
It added that if contempt cases are to linger on inordinately without compliance, the very existence of this court is meaningless.
The “couldn’t careless” attitude of the Executive gives an impression to the court that it has to resort to firm measures to ensure that the orders passed by the judiciary are complied with in letter and spirit and are taken more seriously than the way it has been till date, noted the bench.
It said that in order to restore a semblance of sanity by achieving compliance of its orders, this court has to “take precipitate measures and shall not hesitate to do so”.
Putting the UT bureaucracy on guard, the bench said “what has been happening till now with the orders of this court shall no longer be tolerated”.
Listing the matter on Thursday as case no. 1, the division bench directed all the contemnors including the Chief Secretary, Secretary General Administration Department, Secretary Finance and Secretary PWD to remain present in person before the court.
It warned that if any of the contemnors do not comply with the direction for personal appearance “this court shall resort to coercive measures to secure their presence”.
Interestingly, pursuant to the directions given in the morning, the bench had directed the contemnors being the Chief Secretary, Finance Secretary, Secretary GAD and Secretary PWD R&B to join the proceedings through video conferencing at 2:30 PM to answer the charge of contempt.
The Principal Secretary Finance and the Secretary PWD (R&B) joined the proceedings through video conferencing but the secretary GAD did not join as he was on “leave”.
As regards the Chief Secretary, the Advocate General, DC Rania informed the court “the Chief Secretary is desirous to join the proceedings and is in the process of joining the video conference in a few minutes and the delay was solely on account of connectivity issues”.
However, that never happened. A short while later, the Law Secretary Achal Sethi appeared through video conferencing and informed that “the Chief Secretary is unable to appear through video conferencing as he is busy in a meeting”.
The bench observed we are “unable to ascertain as to who is lying”. The official versions are starkly disparate and in gross contradiction to each other, it said.
