J&K High Court defers final hearing to Mar 20 in case concerning LG’s power to nominate MLAs

Jammu, Feb 6 (PTI) The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has scheduled the final hearing on March 20 for a PIL challenging the authority of the J&K Lieutenant Governor to nominate five members to the Legislative Assembly of the Union Territory.

A division bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Rajesh Sekhri directed both parties to complete the pleadings, including replies and counter-replies, by March 20 when the final hearing takes place.

During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the respondents, while Senior Supreme Court lawyer Dr Abhishek Manu Singh, along with D K Khajuria, represented the petitioner Ravinder Sharma.

The court said that the bench will be available for the entire day on March 20.

Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan had last October constituted a special division bench to hear the public interest litigation concerning the nomination of the five MLAs.

On October 14, the Supreme Court declined to entertain the plea and directed the petitioner to approach the high court.

The petition challenges the provisions of the J&K Reorganisation Act, which empowers the LG to nominate five MLAs.

According to the petition, the LG is required to seek the aid and advice of the council of ministers before making such nominations, otherwise, the provisions are considered ultra vires to the basic spirit and structure of the Constitution, petitioner Sharma argued.

In a related development, retired government officer Ravinder Singh and Gurdev Singh, President of the Jammu Kashmir Sharnarthi Action Committee, filed an application seeking impleadment as party respondents and permission to intervene in the PIL through advocate S S Ahmed.

The applicants, who are residents of Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) and migrated to this side during 1947, argued that due to the significant public importance of the matter, they should be allowed to intervene and be heard.

The court acknowledged the public importance of the PIL and affirmed that anyone with a stake in the matter could be heard.