SRINAGAR: The J&K High Court on Monday asked the state government to file details about measures taken for safety of mines, mine workers, and mining property, anew, after expressing dissatisfaction on the reply furnished by the state.
Giving four weeks time on the request of Additional Advocate General (AAG), B A Dar, the court observed that filing affidavits without giving requisite information doesn’t answer the court’s query regarding the issue.
“In terms of order dated 28.8.2018, the State Government was asked to file the affidavit with regard to implementation of existing safety measures as provided under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act and the Rules. However, the affidavit filed does not disclose the safety measures as was directed but talks of the rules and the laws on the subject as it states in paragraph no. 2 that the State of Jammu and Kashmir is bound to ensure the safety of their Mines, Mine Workers and the Mining Property in accordance with the safety measures as are provided under these Rules/ Law. Thus the information sought by the Court is not furnished,” the division bench of Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey and Justice Sanjeev Kumar said while hearing a PIL on mining filed by an NGO, People’s Forum.
The court observed that due to mining, precious lives are lost and thus safety gadgets and medical facility should be in place on mining sites.
Meanwhile, the details in respect of the appointments made for different positions in the mining activities with particulars of their position and qualification was furnished before court.
M I Qadri, counsel for the petitioner organisation was directed to file response to the state’s affidavit and file the report on next date of hearing.
Meanwhile, an application was moved by advocate Amtul Basit seeking to declare the SRO 267 as unconstitutional to the extent of making amendments in clause XLVII of Rule 2 by virtue of which the candidates possessing qualification of Chemical Engineering and post-graduation in Chemistry have been excluded from holding the post of District Mineral Officers.
The court dismissed the application on the ground that it does not fall within the domain of the PIL.