J&K&L High Court Orders Probe Against JMC Officials For Ignoring Court-Mandated Structural Report; Says Compensation To Be Levied From Salaries

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has directed the Chief Secretary of Jammu & Kashmir to conduct a probe into the role of officials of the Jammu Municipal Corporation after finding that a fresh structural safety audit was ordered despite an earlier engineering report obtained pursuant to court directions declaring the premises safe. Holding that such conduct amounted to disregard of a judicial mandate, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal further directed that compensation payable to the affected shopkeepers be recovered from the salaries of the delinquent officers and not from the public exchequer.Setting aside the impugned order of the Municipal Commissioner directing a fresh structural audit, the Court held that administrative authorities cannot reopen issues already concluded through a court-mandated expert inquiry. The Court warned that attempts by government officials to circumvent binding judicial directions would undermine the discipline of administrative functioning and invite personal accountability.“Once a competent court issues a direction requiring reconsideration of a matter strictly in the light of an expert report, the authority concerned cannot reopen the very issue by directing another inquiry. Such an exercise not only defeats the judicial mandate but also undermines the discipline which must govern administrative functioning.”Background:The petitioners, shopkeepers by vocation, had been carrying on business for several years in shops situated in a commercial building located at Exchange Road in Jammu. According to them, the shops were their only source of livelihood.The controversy arose after the private respondents, who were the landlords of the building, approached the municipal authorities claiming that the structure had become unsafe. Acting on a communication from the engineering wing of the Public Works Department declaring the building unsafe, the Jammu Municipal Corporation issued notices under the Jammu Municipal Corporation Act, 2000 requiring demolition or major repairs of the structure.Aggrieved by the action, the tenants approached the High Court. During earlier proceedings, the Court directed the constitution of an expert engineering committee to inspect the building and submit a report regarding its structural stability. The inspection was conducted in the presence of all stakeholders and under the supervision of the Additional District Magistrate.The committee subsequently submitted a report declaring the shops structurally safe for commercial use, recommending only minor repairs in one of the units. However, instead of deciding the matter in light of the report as directed by the Court, the Municipal Commissioner issued another order directing a private empanelled firm to conduct a fresh structural safety audit. This order was challenged by the petitioners in the present proceedings.Court's Observations:After examining the record, the High Court held that the Municipal Commissioner had clearly acted in contravention of the earlier judgment passed by the Court directing reconsideration of the issue strictly in the light of the engineering report. The Court emphasized that administrative authorities must comply with judicial directions in letter and spirit and cannot bypass them by initiating parallel processes. “Reconsideration 'in light of the report' necessarily obligated the authority either to accept the findings of the expert body or, in the alternative, to record cogent, legally sustainable and reasoned grounds for differing from such findings.”, the court remarked. The Court further held that directing a fresh safety audit through another agency without assigning reasons for discarding the expert report amounted to abdication of statutory duty and could not be sustained in law. It stressed that technical questions such as structural safety of buildings fall within the domain of engineering experts and not within the adjudicatory competence of courts or administrative authorities acting without technical expertise. “ Once a competent engineering authority, after conducting an extensive technical exercise under judicial supervision, submits its report, there remains no legal justification either for this Court or for administrative authorities to doubt the findings recorded therein.”, the court reasoned. Observing that the Municipal Commissioner could not sit in appeal over the findings of a committee constituted under the Court's directions Justice Nargal opined, “Once a competent expert body has rendered its findings pursuant to judicial directions, the administrative authority cannot sit in appeal over such findings, nor can it arrogate to itself the power to order a fresh inquiry through another agency.”The Court also took serious note of the hardship suffered by the petitioners, who were small shopkeepers dependent upon the premises for their livelihood. It stated, “The petitioners are shopkeepers dependent upon the said premises for their livelihood… They...

J&K&L High Court Orders Probe Against JMC Officials For Ignoring Court-Mandated Structural Report; Says Compensation To Be Levied From Salaries

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags