Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Rajeshwari Katoch vs State And Others on 28 December, 2021
Sr. No. 11
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
CJ Court
Case: LPAOW No. 98 of 2017
Rajeshwari Katoch .....Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Appellant is present in person.
v/s
State and others .....Respondent(s)
Through :- Sh. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
ORDER
1. Ms. Rajeshwari Katoch, petitioner in person initiated a Public Interest
Litigation highlighting the shortcomings faced during the pilgrimage to Mata
Vaishno Devi Shrine and, as such, through the medium of the petition wanted
enhancement of the quality of service and facilities available to the pilgrims
and for issuance of necessary direction in this regard to the Shri Mata Vaishno
Devi Shrine Board (for short 'the Board').
2. The writ petition was disposed of vide judgment and order dated
17.04.2017 observing the need to initiate steps in regard to certain problems
highlighted by the petitioner. It was observed that Section 18 of the Jammu and
Kashmir Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Shrine Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act') obliges
the Board to provide adequate facilities to the pilgrims. Most of the issues
highlighted by the petitioner relate to the facilities that the pilgrims should be
given. The said issues have already been addressed by the Board and periodical
board meetings which conducted under His Excellency the Governor of the
State (now the Lt. Governor of the Union Territory) to review and improving
the facilities to be given to the pilgrims.
3. It was also observed that in the year 2005-06, about 77 hectares of forest
area has been brought under plantation. Similarly, in the year 2008-09 and
2010-11, 75 hectares have been covered, whereas in the year 2011-12 and
2012-13, 92 hectares have been covered.
4. The court thus declining to issue any specific direction to the Board
expected the Board to look into the grievance expressed by the petitioner and
to take appropriate steps wherever it is found lacking. At the same time, the
State and the Katra Development Authority were granted time to re-allocate the
bus stand at the new site identified for the purpose.
5. The petitioner not being satisfied by the above judgment and order has
preferred this LPA.
6. The simple grievance of the Appellant is that the accounts of the Board
on being audited annually are not being published and, at the same time, a
report on the administration of the affairs of the Board is not being prepared
and published for the information of the public.
7. Sh. Adarsh Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the Board has pointed
out to the affidavit of one-Simrandeep Singh, Chief Executive Officer of the
Board filed on 27.05.2019, wherein it has been stated that the administrative
reports for the years 1991-92 till 1998-99 have duly been published.
8. Sh. Adarsh Sharma further submits that the said reports are also
available on the website of the Board.
9. However, the aforesaid affidavit falls short of stating that the accounts of
the Board have been audited annually by the Chartered Accountants and have
been duly published.
10. Section 22 of the Act provides for audit of the accounts of the Board
annually by the chartered accountant nominated by the Board. Secondly, it also
requires that the Board shall prepare a report on the administration of the
affairs of the Shrine and to publish it for information of the public.
11. In view of the above, we direct Sh. Adarsh Sharma, learned counsel
appearing for the Board to have specific instructions from the Chief Executive
Officer and to bring on record the complete details of the certificate of audit of
the accounts of the Board annually and to indicate as to whether the
administrative reports prepared have been published for information to the
public. The affidavit to this effect may be filed within a month.
12. List on 17.03.2022.
(JAVED IQBAL WANI) (PANKAJ MITHAL)
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
JAMMU
28.12.2021
TILAK
