J&K High Court slams state administration as a 'sorry state of affairs'

The displeasure over the non-compliance with its directions led the Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) High Court to come heavily down on the state administration, terming it a “sorry state of affairs” and accusing it of demonstrating “utter contempt” for the judiciary.

The court's remarks came during a contempt petition hearing on August 5, the fifth anniversary of the abrogation of Article 370, involving several senior officials including the Chief Secretary of J&K.

The contempt proceedings were initiated against J&K Chief Secretary and other senior officials, including Finance Secretary Santosh D. Vaidya and the Secretary of the Public Works Department, Bhupinder Kumar. Both Vaidya and Kumar joined the proceedings via video conferencing, while the court was informed that the Secretary of the General Administration Department was on leave.

The case took a dramatic turn when two senior officials provided conflicting explanations for the Chief Secretary’s absence. The Advocate General of J&K attributed the absence to “connectivity issues,” while the Law Secretary reported that the Chief Secretary was “busy in a meeting.” This discrepancy led the court to express concerns about the truthfulness of the explanations, suggesting a troubling scenario where the administration was neglecting court orders with disdain.

The contempt petition is part of a broader legal issue related to pay disparity within the J&K Public Works Department. The court had previously ruled that the Chief Engineer, holding a higher position than the Superintending Engineer, should receive a higher pay scale. Despite this ruling, the administration allegedly failed to address the disparity, prompting further judicial scrutiny.

On August 10 of the previous year, the court had ordered that the Chief Engineer should receive a higher pay scale compared to the Superintending Engineer, in accordance with constitutional provisions.

However, the J&K administration’s delay in complying with this order led to the filing of a writ petition against the judgment in the Supreme Court. The court observed that the petition was filed 10 months after the initial order, with numerous defects still unresolved, indicating a lack of genuine intent to comply with the court’s directives.

The high court’s criticism extended to the overall justice system in J&K, highlighting the significant backlog of over 6,000 contempt petitions. The delay in compliance with court orders has been described as reducing the justice dispensation system to a “cruel joke,” with some cases pending for over a decade.

The court lamented that its excessive leniency towards the executive had only led to a worsening situation, necessitating firmer measures to ensure compliance with judicial orders.

In response to the ongoing issues, the court has warned of potential “precipitate measures” to restore order and enforce the rule of law. The officials involved in the contempt proceedings have been ordered to appear in person at the next hearing, scheduled for August 8. The court has indicated that failure to comply with this directive could result in coercive measures to secure their presence.

The high court’s stern remarks come amidst another contentious issue involving the judiciary and administration. The court had previously summoned IAS officer Shyambir Singh, who is accused of harassing a judge over a judicial matter. The high court has warned that any attempts to evade service of summons or non-appearance will be viewed seriously, with potential coercive actions to ensure his presence.