J&K&L High Court Directs Action Against Special Tribunal Member For Allowing Compounding Of Major Building Violations
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has directed its Registry to forward a Registrar Vigilance report to the Chief Secretary of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir for taking appropriate legal action against a former member of the J&K Special Tribunal, after the inquiry concluded that 65 matters were compounded for “extraneous consideration” and that major...
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has directed its Registry to forward a Registrar Vigilance report to the Chief Secretary of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir for taking appropriate legal action against a former member of the J&K Special Tribunal, after the inquiry concluded that 65 matters were compounded for “extraneous consideration” and that major violations were permitted to be compounded in violation of law.
The Court was hearing an PIL instituted by Dr. Abdul Rouf Malik claiming to represent the inhabitants of Gogji Bagh, Srinagar, concerning the erection and re-erection of residential and commercial buildings and complexes allegedly in gross violation of Building Bye-laws. The Court noted that the primary grievance raised in the PIL was already being addressed in separate proceedings before the High Court.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice (Acting) Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani observed,
“However, we cannot lose sight of the fact that during the course of proceedings in this PIL, it came to the notice of this Court that a particular member of the J&K Special Tribunal had passed several orders, about 65 in number in a row, compounding the major violations.”
The PIL was initiated by Dr. Abdul Rouf Malik, claiming to be the representative of the inhabitants of Gogji Bagh, Srinagar. The petition raised concerns regarding the erection and re-erection of residential and commercial buildings and complexes in the area, alleging gross violations of Building Bye-laws.
During the pendency of the proceedings, the High Court intervened in the matter and the persons responsible for raising the residential and commercial buildings allegedly in violation of the Building Bye-laws were put on notice by the Srinagar Municipal Corporation. The petitioner's counsel informed the Court that the aggrieved persons thereafter availed the appropriate remedies and approached the J&K Special Tribunal.
The Court was informed that the matter arising from those proceedings was then pending before a Single Judge of the High Court at the instance of the Srinagar Municipal Corporation. The petitioner therefore submitted that the primary grievance highlighted in the PIL was being dealt with in separate proceedings.
However, during the course of the PIL, the Court noticed that a particular member of the J&K Special Tribunal had passed approximately 65 orders in succession permitting compounding of major violations. The High Court consequently directed a fact-finding inquiry by the Registrar Vigilance. The Registrar Vigilance thereafter submitted a detailed report, which was placed on the record before the Division Bench.
The Bench first considered whether the PIL itself required to be continued. Since the primary grievance concerning alleged violations of Building Bye-laws was already being addressed by the High Court in separate proceedings, the Bench stated that it did not wish to continue with the PIL.
The Court nevertheless considered the issue concerning the orders passed by the particular Tribunal member separately. It recorded that, during the proceedings, it had come to its notice that the member had passed “several orders, about 65 in number in a row, compounding the major violations.”
The Court thus proceeded on the basis of the conclusion recorded in the vigilance report and directed that the report be placed before the Chief Secretary of the Union Territory for appropriate legal action. While issuing the direction, the Bench described the concerned public servant as an “erring public servant who is prima facie found guilty of violating the law and compounding the major violations for extraneous considerations.”
With these directions, the PIL was closed.
Case Title: Inhabitants of Gogji Bagh, Srinagar v. Union Territory of J and K and Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (JKL) 326
Appearances
Petitioner: Mir Suhail, Advocate
Respondents: Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG with Maha Majeed, AC; Bikramdeep Singh, Dy. AG; Z.A. Qureshi, Sr. Advocate with Anurag Verman, Advocate