Sr. AAG filed Supplementary Compliance Report & DB directs Adv. S.S. Ahmed to file his response.
In the much publicized Public Interest Litigation (PIL No.17/2020) seeking eviction of Ex-MLAs/Ex-Ministers from the Ministerial Bungalows/Government Accommodation, Senior AAG S.S. Nanda appearing on behalf of Estates Department filed a Fresh Supplementary Compliance Report on February 18th, 2025 wherein it has been submitted that pursuant to order dated April 3rd, 2024 passed by the Division Bench then headed by Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh (now Judge of the Supreme Court of India), individual orders were passed in each case (except in case of Mst. Wazira Begum, Political Person and Sona Ullah Lone, Political Person who had already vacated Government Accommodation) after taking into consideration different orders of the Division Bench as well as the J&K Estates Department (Allotment of Government Accommodation) Regulations, 2004 and SOPs issued from time to time. The Division Bench on April 3rd, 2024 had directed both Director Estates, Jammu as well as Srinagar to hear all 43 Political Persons individually and then individual orders be passed in respect of these 43 persons.
In the Supplementary Compliance Report, it is further submitted that the Estates Department upon the directions of Division Bench evicted all the Ex-Legislators/Political Persons whose list was submitted before the Division Bench and were not entitled to Government accommodation, except Ravinder Sharma, Ex-MLC who has approached the High Court and the court vide order dated July 26th, 2017 in LPA (OW) No.65/2017 titled Ravinder Kumar Sharma V/s State of J&K and Ors. has directed to maintain Status Quo with regard to the possession in respect of Government Accommodation. The order of Status Quo has been extended by the court in OWP No.1120/2017 titled Ravinder Sharma V/s State of J&K.
Besides, seven occupants namely Nizam Ud Din Bhat, Fayaz Ahmed Mir, M.Y. Tarigami, Sajad Gani Lone, Sunil Sharma, Daleep Singh Parihar and R.S. Pathania were elected as MLAs and have been allotted Government accommodation as per the Residential Accommodation of the Members of the Jammu & Kashmir State Legislator Rules, 1973. The Compliance Report further states that as per the directions of the Competent Authority, the provisions of charging penal rent are being amended thereby linking Charging of Penal Rent to the End of Occupation rather than issuance of Final Eviction Notice and appropriate orders in this regard shall be issued shortly after receiving approval of Competent Authority.
Sr. AAG S.S. Nanda appearing for the Estates Department further submitted that since the directions of the Division Bench have been complied, as such, the instant PIL be closed.
At this stage, Advocate Sheikh Shakeel Ahmed with Advocates Rahul Raina and Supriya Chouhan appearing for the petitioner submitted that in the Supplementary Compliance Report filed by the Sr. AAG S.S. Nanda, there is no mention of charging of commercial rent from the unauthorised occupants who illegally continued for more than six years and there are repeated directions from the Division Bench as to why the commercial rent has not been charged from the illegal occupants and there is no compliance of these directions and Advocate S.S. Ahmed submitted that the PIL is required to be taken to its logical conclusion by recovering commercial rent from the illegal occupants.
Advocate S.S. Ahmed further submitted that how there can be two laws in a UT, as the Estates Department on the recommendations of the Designated Committee constituted under Government Order of 2016 has continued the retention of Government Accommodation in favour of Former Chief Minister, Ghulam Nabi Azad and Former State President of BJP, Ravinder Raina when the Division Bench while rejecting the plea of Ch. Lal Singh (Ex-MP and Z-Protectee) in the instant PIL (CM No. 7467/2022 & 7468/2022 in PIL No.17/2020) vide its Order dated December 26th, 2022 held that accommodation and security are two distinct factors and the Estates Department is duty bound to comply the Division Bench orders and not the recommendations of the Designated Committee.
Advocate S.S. Ahmed also referred to a judgment dated September 14th, 2022 passed by the High Court of Delhi in the case of Ex-Rajya Sabha Member Dr. Subramanian Swamy wherein Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by ‘Z’ Category Protectee who was directed to vacate the Government Accommodation on completion of his term as Member Rajya Sabha. While dismissing the petition of the high profile politician, Delhi High Court directed the Ex-MP to ensure that vacant possession of the house in question is handed over to the concerned Estate Officer within a period of six weeks.
Advocate S.S. Ahmed further submitted that till the consideration of aforementioned vital issues, the PIL warrants to be continued in larger public interest.
At this stage, the Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan in the open court put a specific query to Sr. AAG S.S. Nanda as to why commercial rent was not charged from the occupants in view of several observations of the Division Bench and upon this the Sr. AAG stated that rules with regard to penal rent are being amended and the matter has been referred to the Competent Authority.
The Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M.A. Chowdhary after considering the submissions of Advocate S.S. Ahmed asked him to file his response to the Supplementary Compliance Report filed by Sr. AAG, if he so desires.