Abdul Rahim Rather vs State Of Jk & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 166 j&K/2

                                                                SERIAL NO. 101 (v)
                                                              ADMISSION CAUSELIST

              HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
                        AT SRINAGAR
                                                               OWP No. 641/2016
                                                                 IA No. 01/2016
Abdul Rahim Rather.
                                                                 ..... Petitioner(s)
                           Through: - Mr M.I. Qadiri, Senior Advocate with
                                        Mr Mir Naveed Gul, Advocate.

                                       V/s
State of JK & Ors.
                                                               ..... Respondent(s)
                               Through: - Mr B.A. Dar, Sr AAG.
CORAM:
             Hon'ble Mr Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey, Judge.
             Hon'ble Mr Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, Judge.
                                     ORDER

18.02.2021 During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner

invited attention of the Court to clause (e) of Jammu and Kashmir Estates

Department (Allotment of Government Accommodation) Regulations, 2004,

to demonstrate the petitioner is entitled to accommodation under 5%

discretionary quota as a Former Legislator and additionally claims such

accommodation on the ground of having been assessed as Z+ Category, on

the basis of threat. He further invited attention of the Court to the rejoinder

affidavit wherein, it is stated that petitioner on losing the status as Minister of

Government of Jammu and Kashmir, was allotted Private House No. 7,

namely, Fayaza House, Friends Colony Humhama, Srinagar, which was

extended by the Government w.e.f. 01.05.2015. Mr Qadiri, learned senior

counsel further submits that the petitioner is occupying the aforesaid private

accommodation since its allotment and is continuously depositing the rent,

which as stated, is acknowledged by the Deputy Director, Estates, Srinagar.

He submits that the petitioner is not claiming continuation of the alleged

accommodation as a matter of right as a Former Minister but due to discretion under drawn in the case when he has threat to his life, which is assessed by

the security agencies of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir. It is

submitted that the Government of Jammu and Kashmir cannot by any stretch

of imagination deprive the petitioner from the right of protecting his life as

guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution of India and the Government

is under an obligation to provide not only the security but accommodation also

under 5% discretionary quota in terms of provisions as aforesaid said.

Mr Qadiri, learned senior counsel while strengthening his claim qua

relief prayed for in the writ petition, made reference to the deposition of rent

till ending September, 2020, receipt whereof he wanted to place on record.

Mr B.A. Dar, learned Sr AAG submits that by application of law

including the judgment(s) of Hon'ble Supreme Court as also the directions

passed by this Court in the main PIL and the judgment passed by Jammu Wing

of this Court in a batch of appeals with lead case being Ajay Kumar Sadhotra

vs State of J&K & Ors, bearing LPAOW No. 08/2018; MP No. 01/2018, the

petitioner has lost right of continuation in the Government accommodation or

hired accommodation. Mr Dar, learned Sr AAG further submits that the

respondents have taken a clear stand qua entitlement of the petitioner for

Government accommodation/ private hired accommodation as he has lost the

status of Minister. Mr B.A. Dar, learned Sr AAG also disputes the

deposition/acceptance of any rent on account of private accommodation as

claimed by the petitioner, provided by the Estates Department. The only

deposition the petitioner is making reference is qua the charges for utilization

of furnishing/furniture.

Mr Qadiri, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

seeks permission to place on record additional documents in support of his

claim made and projected in the writ petition as also by oral submissions.

The Court feels it necessary to have the matte settled but before doing

that, permission is granted to the learned senior counsel to place on record the

material in the shape of affidavit which he feels is relevant for the just disposal

of the matter. The needful shall be done within a period of two weeks, with

copy advance to Mr B.A. Dar, learned Sr AAG, who shall file his response

within a period of one week.

Writ petition in view of above, is delinked and shall be listed separately

on 7th of April, 2021.

Interim direction, if any, in force as on date, to continue till next date

of hearing before the Bench.

                                 (Vinod Chatterji Koul)          (Ali Mohammad Magrey)
                                         Judge                           Judge
           SRINAGAR:
           18.02.2021
           "Hamid"




ABDUL HAMID BHAT
2021.02.19 11:52
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document