Mohd. Haneefa Jan and Others v. State of J. & K. and Others

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2016 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 8

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT
Unknown, J
Mohd. Haneefa Jan and Others v. State of J. & K. and Others

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Unknown
For the Respondents: Unknown

Table of Content
1. overview of sro and election procedures. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. arguments on necessity of floor test and legal repercussions. (Para 4 , 7 , 9 , 12)
3. judicial observations on the importance of lawful electoral procedure. (Para 5 , 6 , 10)
4. establishing floor test as the central decision point. (Para 8 , 11)
5. final ruling mandating the floor test. (Para 13 , 14)

1. Quashment of SRO 228 of 2016 dated 05.07.2016 issued by respondent No.1 is sought by petitioners. It (SRO 228 of 2016) provides holding of election of Chairman, LAHDC, Kargil on 18th July, 2016. Petitioners exhort vouchsafe of direction to respondents to hold Floor Test for the post of Chairman / Chief Executive Councillor of Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council, Kargil. They also seek a direction in the name of respondent No.3 restrained him from ceasing or interfering in the powers of Chairman, Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council on the edifice of case set up in writ petition.

2. The succinct factual background tailored in writ petition is that election for constitution of Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council, Kargil (hereinafter referred to as 'LAHDC') was conducted in the year 2013 an