Early Times Report
JAMMU, May 29: A Division Bench of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court comprising Chief Justice Arun Palli and Justice Rajnesh Oswal dismissed the Public Interest Litigation has been filed by Shah Mohammad Choudhary, former member of J&K State Advisory Board for Development of Gujjar and Bakerwals, seeking quashment of the Notification / SRO No. 122 of April 9, 2015 issued by the Government by virtue of which Zaffar Iqbal Manhas, Ashok Khajuria, Vikramaditya Singh, Ramesh Arora, Saif-ud-Din Bhat, Ajatshatru Singh, Mohammad Khurshid Alam and Surinder Mohan Ambardar were nominated as Members of the Legislative Council against the vacancies.
In the PIL, the petitioner has sought quashing of the Government order and declaring the nominations as "illegal, unconstitutional, unsustainable and null and void".
In the PIL, it has also been submitted that treating the nominations as usurper to the Constitutional public position as they lack eligibility / qualifications prescribed under Sub Section 6 of Section 50 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir for such nominations as Members of the Legislative Council. It has also sought direction to respondents to give due representation to socially and economically backward classes in the State, which was the mandate of the Constitution and intention of the Legislature.
DB after hearing both the sides observed that during the pendency of this petition, the Legislative Council ceased to be Reorganization Act 2019. Section 14 of the J&K Reorganization Act 2019 provides for the Legislative Assembly only for the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. Besides, the period of nomination of the private respondents to the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Council also came to expire during the pendency of this petition.
Taking note of the above mentioned subsequent events and obduracy of the petitioner for adjudication of the petition on merits, notwithstanding the factum of the petition having been rendered infructuous, this Court vide order dated 27.07.2023 observed that the petitioner may submit before this Court as to whether the issues raised in this petition are alive as this Court is not expected to undertake any academic exercise, as cause of action does not survive any longer. Thereafter, the petition came to be dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 28.03.2024, but was restored vide order dated 29.04.2024, DB said.
The petitioner has submitted that he has raised vital issues which require adjudication on merits, irrespective of the fact that J&K Legislative Council has ceased to be in existence and the term of the nominated members to the J&K Legislative Council has expired.
Sr. Adv U. K. Jalali, appearing for some of the private respondents, has argued that this petition has been rendered infructuous due to subsequent events, therefore, this petition deserves to be dismissed.
DB after hearing both the sides observed that this is an admitted fact that as on date, J&K Legislative Council is not in existence and, also the term of the nominated members (respondent Nos. 6 to 13) to the J&K Legislative Council has expired. Therefore, even if this petition is adjudicated on merits, it would have no repercussions in future. This Court has already observed that the issues involved in this petition at present, are of only academic interest and this Court is not expected to undertake any academic exercise at the cost of other cases, involving issues of seminal importance.
DB further observed that In the present case, the private respondents have not been elected but nominated to the J&K Legislative Council, which is no more in existence and if the petition is heard and decided on merits, it would be only an academic, time-consuming exercise in futility, without having any repercussions in future but of course resulting in wastage of precious judicial time. In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that no fruitful purpose shall be served, if the petition at hand is decided on merits, as the same has been rendered infructuous due to subsequent events noted as above, by us. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. DB ordered. —JNF |
