Srinagar: The J&K High Court has reprimanded the Additional Deputy Commissioner (ADC) Ananatnag for making the bench believe as if the District Magistrate (DM), was making his presence in the court in a case under J&K Migrant Immovable Property Act.
The court besides “admonishing” A R Malik, the senior additional advocate general (AAG) directed the DM and the ADC Anantnag to remain present before the court on February 13. They have been asked to explain their position and show cause as to why action as warranted under the law be not taken against them.
The court on the last day of the past year had granted a Pandit migrant and the DM a final opportunity of four weeks for filing a reply in the case. In default, the DM was directed to remain present before the court on February 04, 2023.
In the pre-lunch session when the matter was taken up on the scheduled day, the DM Anantnag was neither present before the court nor had he filed any response. The matter was kept on board and again taken up in the post-lunch session.
A R Malik, the AAG, appeared and told the court that “due to a law and order problem, the DC could not appear before the court”. He assured the court that the DM will remain present before the court along with the relevant records on the next date of the hearing.
He also submitted that he has prepared the reply which shall be filed by or before the next date of the hearing positively. The matter was directed to be listed on February 06 for the personal appearance of the DM.
Malik, the official attorney, appeared in the court along with Mohammad Ashraf, the ADC on the specified day. But the appearance was made in a manner making the court to believe as if the DM was making his presence before the court.
The matter was exposed only after a slip was passed on to the concerned stenographer disclosing the particulars of the person present in the court as Mohammad Ashraf (JKAS), ADC Anantnag.
Malik, the senior AAG or even the ADC did not even think it proper to disclose before the court that instead of the DM, actually the ADC was present before the court. Rather they behaved in such a way as if the DM himself was present before the court.
At this, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed: “the act (impersonation) on the part of the ADC is serious and grave in nature and amounts not only to misconduct but also tantamount to contempt of the court and perjury as he has deliberately and intentionally misled the court.”
He said the act on the part of the senior AAG is also unbecoming. “A duty was cast on him to have apprised the court that the DM could not appear before the court for whatever reasons, and instead the ADC is appearing. He should have filed an application seeking DM’s exemption from personal appearance,” said Justice Nargal.
The anguished judge said even that the DM despite the order of the court has evaded his appearance before the court. “No plausible reason has either been pleaded or brought to the notice of the court for his non-appearance and as such the conduct of the officer of such rank is unbecoming and contemptuous in nature,” the judge said.
The DM and the ADC have been directed “to remain present before the court on 13th of February to explain their position and to show cause as to why action as warranted under law be not taken against them”.
Malik, the AAG, has also been directed to file his personal affidavit before the next date of hearing. He has been asked “to explain as to why he has not brought to the notice of the court that instead of DM, the ADC is appearing.”
Counsel for the petitioner, advocate M Ashraf Wani said “the DM Anantnag had directed eviction of a migrant property without giving us an opportunity to be heard”.
