State Of J&K And Ors vs J&K State Human Rights Commission ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 721 j&K/2

                   HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
                             AT SRINAGAR
CJ Court

                               OWP No. 2249/2019



State of J&K and Ors.
                                                  ...Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)

                          Through:     Mr. B. A. Dar, Sr. AAG

                                V/s
J&K State Human Rights Commission and Ors.
                                                             ...Respondent(s)

                          Through:     None



       Coram:
       HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR

                                       ORDER

07-07-2021

Heard Mr. B. A. Dar, learned Sr. AAG for the petitioner. The petitioner has challenged the orders dated 07-12-2017, 25-07-2018, 26-10-2018, 11-12-2018, 13-12-2018 and 22-05-2019 passed by the Jammu & Kashmir State Human Rights Commission (respondent No. 1). The aforesaid orders directs for the payment of compensation and for the personal appearance of the State Officials.

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that under the provisions of the J&K Protection of Human Rights Act, 1997, the Commission can enquire into the complaint and make appropriate recommendation to the Government but has no authority of law to impose any fine or compensation or to direct the personal appearance of the officials for compliance of the order for payment of compensation. The controversy so raised in the petition is no longer res-integra and has also been dealt with by the Division Bench of this Court vide Judgment and Order dated 02-04-2021 passed in OWP No. 1756/2018 and connected petitions, wherein it has been laid down that the Commission has no power either to order for payment of compensation or to issue any other order. The power, in simple terms, is only to make appropriate recommendation to the Government and such recommendations cannot be equated to an executable order inasmuch as Commission is neither a Judicial Authority nor a quasi- Judicial Authority to adjudicate upon the disputed facts. This aspect of the matter is clearly evident from the plain reading of Section 19 of the Act itself which provides for the steps which may be taken by the Commission subsequent to the enquiry. It does not anywhere authorize the Commission to determine compensation and to release the same.

In view of the above said factual circumstances, the impugned orders are not tenable in law and, as such, are quashed.

The writ petition is allowed.

          (SANJAY DHAR)                  (PANKAJ MITHAL)
                  JUDGE                     CHIEF JUSTICE

Srinagar
07.07.2021
Sakeena




                                                                         SAKEENA MOLVI
                                                                         I attest to the accuracy and
                                                                         authenticity of this document

                                                                         09.07.2021 02:33