The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has criticised the Union Territory (UT) administration for what it described as a "cruel joke" on the justice system due to widespread non-compliance with court orders.

The Division Bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Javed Iqbal Wani expressed frustration over the J&K administration's apparent disregard for judicial directives, noting that over 6,000 contempt petitions are currently pending before the High Court.

"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 has reduced the justice dispensation system in the UT to a cruel joke," the Court said.

The Court's anger was sparked by the absence of Chief Secretary Atal Dulloo during a video conference in a contempt of court case related to the pay scale of Chief Engineers.

Although Advocate General DC Raina assured the Bench that the Chief Secretary was eager to join the proceedings but faced connectivity issues, Law Secretary Achal Sethi contradicted this by claiming that the Chief Secretary was busy in a meeting.

The Court expressed skepticism about these conflicting statements, noting that it was unclear who was providing accurate information. "As of now, this Court is unable to ascertain as to who is lying, whether it is the person who informed the Ld. Advocate General that the Chief Secretary is keen to join the proceedings and shall do so in a few minutes or whether it was the Law Secretary who was instructed to state incorrectly on behalf of the Chief Secretary," the Court said.

The Court also criticized the delay in filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court, questioning why it took ten months to file the SLP after the order was issued. The Principal Secretary of the Finance Department acknowledged a four-month delay after receiving the sanction to file the SLP in February 2024 but was unable to provide a satisfactory explanation.

Upon examining the Supreme Court's website, the Court found that while the SLP was filed on June 25, none of the defects identified by the Supreme Court Registry had been addressed. The Court expressed its disappointment, remarking that the UT government's conduct demonstrated a lack of sincerity in complying with the Court's orders.

"From the manner in which the Union Territory 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," the Division Bench remarked.

The Bench also commented on the broader issue of non-compliance with judicial orders in J&K, attributing the situation to the excessive latitude traditionally shown by the Court to maintain a harmonious relationship with the executive. The Court observed, "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. This environment has come to exist on account of the excessive latitude being shown by this Court, time and again, only to maintain a harmonious relationship between the judiciary and the executive".

The Court warned that if contempt cases continue to linger without compliance, it would be compelled to take firm measures to ensure that its orders, as well as those of lower courts, are taken seriously.

"..the very existence of this Court is meaningless. The "couldn't careless" attitude of the executive to ensure that the orders passed by this Court and by other courts judicially inferior to the High Court, are complied with in letter and spirit and are taken more seriously than the way it has been till date," the Court said.

Consequently, the Court emphasized that the UT administration and its bureaucracy should be on notice that non-compliance with court orders would no longer be tolerated.

The Bench directed the contemnors, including the Chief Secretary, Finance Secretary, Secretary of the General Administration Department, and Secretary of PWD R&B, to appear in person on August 8. "If any of them does not comply with the direction for personal appearance on 08.08.2024, this Court shall resort to coercive measures to secure their presence," the Bench said in its order dated August 5.

Cause Title: Sheikh Mohammad Husain and Others vs Atal Dullo and Others. [CCP (D) No. 6/2024]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Senior Advocate RA Jan, Advocate Syed Bhat

Respondent: Advocate General (AG) DC Raina, Senior Additional Advocate General Abdul Rashid Malik

Click here to read/download the Order


Justice Atul SreedharanJustice Javed Iqbal WaniJammu & Kashmir & Ladakh High Court

Sukriti Mishra