news details |
|
|
| DB expresses anguish over non-filing of compliance report by JMC, imposes Rs 15,000 cost | | PIL seeking closure of 59 unregistered dairies/establishment of gowshala | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Nov 9: A division bench of High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh comprising Chief Justice, Pankaj Mithal and Justice Puneet Gupta while expressing its deep anguish/displeasure over the non-filing of the compliance report by Jammu Municipal Corporation (JMC) in terms of order dated March 18, 2021 read with order dated August, 18, 2021 whereby the Division bench had directed the counsel for JMC to seek instructions and to make a statement on the instructions from the JMC as to the time-frame within which unauthorized dairies shall be removed from the municipal limits and the proposed Gowshala (Cattle Pound) would be made operational after completing all necessary formalities.
The DB had directed that the counsel for JMC will also submit the complete blueprint in this regard. The similar directions were reiterated on August 18, 2021 when the counsel for JMC sought adjournment and had been allowed further four weeks time to comply the order dated March, 18, 2021. The DB took serious note of non-filing of the compliance report and upon this, the DB reluctantly granted two weeks time to Advocate Harshvardhan Gupta, appearing for JMC to file the response of the JMC subject to the payment of costs of Rs. 15,000/- by JMC which has to be deposited in the registry of the High Court on or before the next date. The DB further directed that the response shall be filed on affidavit of the Municipal Commissioner and none else and in case, such a response is not filed within the time provided, the Municipal Commissioner shall personally appear before the Court on the next date.
When this PIL came up for hearing, Advocate S S Ahmed vehemently argued that JMC is non-serious towards the relocation of unregistered/illegal dairies and there is no progress towards the establishment of modern Gowshala and it is unfortunate that the JMC has miserably failed to report compliance of orders dated March 18, 2021 and August 18, 2021.
Advocate Harshvardhan appearing for JMC tried to resist the submissions of Advocate Ahmed and requested the DB that there were certain developments which delayed the filing of the compliance report and further submitted that cost of Rs. 15,000 may not be imposed upon JMC and he be granted a short adjournment to file the compliance report of previous orders of the Court. However, the DB headed by Chief Justice did not concede to the prayer made by the counsel for JMC.
The DB withdrew the embargo with liberty to the parties to avail the statutory remedy available under the Forest Act and to approach the High Court only if there is no remedy provided against any action or order. The DB directed that any person who may have preferred a Writ Petition directly against the order of DFO may also approach the appellate authorities if he so feels and is advised and their appeals would be decided in accordance with law and the writ petitions filed by such persons would stand disposed of in terms of this order.
The DB made it clear that the appellate authority would consider the limitation of filing the appeal from the date of this order in cases where the orders have been passed by the DFO earlier or alternatively, to condone the delay in filing such appeals by granting the benefit of section 14 of the Limitation Act as the persons aggrieved were availing the remedy before this Court pursuant to the direction as referred to above. It is further provided that in case the appeals are so filed within time as provided above, the interim order of status quo passed by this Court would continue to operate till the appeals so filed are finally decided by the appellate authority. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
