New Delhi: The Supreme Court dismissed Jammu and Kashmir government’s challenge to a High Court order which directed the J&K authorities to create 334 judicial posts within 60 days.
A bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti noted that while the main matter was pending before the High Court, the observations contained in the order being an interim order were “tentative”.
In November this year, the High Court had directed the government to complete the process of creating 334 posts in the HC within a period of 60 days.
Hearing a petition, a division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani had observed that the matter has remained pending with the Government for more than eight years without any “palpable progress”.
The HC’s Division Bench also took exception to a communication by the Government, stating that it examined the staff strengths of High Court of Himachal Pradesh (which has 17 Judges) and High Court of Allahabad (which has two notified benches at Lucknow and Allahabad).
“The above is nothing but contempt of the Court orders. On the judicial side, vide order dated 08.02.2023, this Court, in paragraph no. 6, had unequivocally held “we need not reiterate that the recommendation made by the High Court/Hon’ble Chief Justice with respect to creation of posts are binding on the Government and there is no discretion in the matter”,” the division bench said, adding, “Once the High Court has given on the judicial side its requirement for 334 posts, the act of the Government in stating that it would have to examine the requirement of the High Court based on the parameters of the number of judges working in the High Court and the number of posts against ongoing cases and also examining the requirement of this Court of 334 posts while drawing a comparison with the High Court of Himachal Pradesh and the Allahabad High Court with its principal seat at Allahabad and one Bench at Lucknow, is gross contempt.”
It is not for the UT to examine whether the requirement of the High Court is just or improper and the High Court through the Chief Justice is the sole authority which is entitled to decide its requirement and there can be no examination of the same by the executive, the Division Bench had said.
“It is understandable, if the executive had expressed its inability to comply on grounds of lack of funds but anything beyond that of examining whether the requirement is justified or not is an act of gross contumacious conduct,” the Division Bench had said, adding, “The bureaucracy has misguided itself by trying to compare the requirements of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir with the High court of Himachal Pradesh and the High Court of Allahabad.”
SC Dismisses Govt’s Plea Against Creation Of 334 Judicial Posts In 2 Months
