SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(J&K) 407

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Alok Aradhe, Sanjeev Kumar, JJ.
Sumit Nayyar - Petitioner
Vs.
State of J&K and Ors. - Respondents
WPPIL No. 38 of 2013, MP No. 01, 02 of 2015; 01 of 2014; 01 of 2017
Decided On : 14-08-2017

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sunil Sethi, Mr. Sumit Nayar
For the Respondents: Mr. Rohit Kapoor, Mr. W.S. Nargal, Mr. Amrish Kapoor

Urgency and the need for immediate action to address security concerns can influence the court's decision-making process.

Headnote:

Planning Department - Public Interest Litigation - The court directed the Planning Department to take urgent measures for the security and safety of the High Court and District Court Complex, including the construction of a wall, installation of CCTV cameras, and regulation of entry into the court premises.

Fact of the Case:

The court directed the Planning Department to take urgent measures for the security and safety of the High Court and District Court Complex, including the construction of a wall, installation of CCTV cameras, and regulation of entry into the court premises.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the issue of security and safety of the court complex was urgent and required immediate action. It constituted a committee to convene a meeting and submit a report within a specified timeframe regarding infrastructure, security requirements, and measures for regulating entry into the court complex.

Issues: The main issue was the urgency of addressing security and safety concerns at the High Court and District Court Complex.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the urgency of the security issue and the need for immediate action to ensure the safety of the court complex, advocates, retired judges, and visitors.

Final Decision: The court directed the Planning Department to take immediate action, constituted a committee to address security concerns, and set a timeline for the submission of a report.

JUDGMENT :

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to implead Planning Department through Commissioner/Secretary as party respondent in this Public Interest Litigation. Let necessary amended be incorporated in the cause title of the writ petition during the course of day.

2. Issue notice to the newly added respondents. Mr. Rohit Kapoor, AAG, waives notice on his behalf.

3. This Court passed detailed order on 19.07.2017, by which the Planning Department was directed to send the proposal with regard to construction of wall around High Court as well as District Court Complex and thereafter for sending it to the Finance Department. We had also directed the Finance Department to sanction amount for installation of CCTV Cameras and for release of the amount for construction of an alternate road as per the cost component already worked out by the R&B Department in the Comprehensive Security Plan.

4. Mr. B.S. Salathia, Sr. Advocate, who is the President of Bar Association, Jammu was also requested to workout modalities of the members of the Bar and to suggest the measures for regulating the entry of the litigants, who visit the Court complex.

5. When the matter was taken up today, Mr. Rohit Kapoor, learned AAG, submitted that in compliance to the order dated 19.07.2017, an amount of Rs. 77.12 lacs has been sanctioned and released by the Law Department for construction of alternate Court road and for installation of CCTV Cameras in the Court Complex. Learned AAG, however, unable to point out as to within which time limit the aforesaid amount shall be utilized for aforesaid purpose.

6. We are not satisfied with the submissions made on behalf of the respondents. In view of the urgency of the issue involved in the writ petition, it can brook no delay. Taking into account the fact that issue relating to security and safety of the High Court Complex as well as District Court Complex, Advocates, retired Judges of this Court and Ex. Advocate Generals, we deem it appropriate to constitute a committee of the following members:

1. Commissioner/Secretary to J&K Government, Planning Department.

2. Commissioner/Secretary to Government, J&K Finance Department.

3. Commissioner/Secretary to J&K Government, Law Department and Legislative affairs.

4. Commissioner/Secretary to J&K Government Home Department.

5. Registrar General, High Court of J&K.

6. President, Bar Association, Jammu.

7. The aforesaid Committee shall convene a meeting within a period of two weeks from today and the Committee shall submit its report within two weeks thereafter regarding infrastructure, approach road to the High Court Complex/District Court Complex, security requirements, preparation of e-cards to the members of the Bar Association, Jammu as well as measures for regulating the entry in the Court Complex so that no any other person may enter in the Court Premises.

8. In view of the order dated 29.10.2013 passed by this Court, Mr. S.S. Nanda, Sr. AAG, who ordinary represents Municipal Corporation, Jammu, shall take steps for removal of bushes/shrubs from the area around the High Court as well as District Court Complex, which may be used for the purpose of hiding, within a period of one week from today. Registry to reflect the name of Mr. S.S. Nanda, Sr. AAG in the cause list.

9. A copy each of this order be provided to the learned counsel for the parties as well as Mr. S. S. Nanda, Sr. AAG, who represents Municipal Corporation, Jammu under the seal and signature of the Bench Secretary.

10. Let the writ petition be listed for further orders in the week commencing 11.09.2017.



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top