Romesh Chander And Others vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 1770 j&K

                                                                   Sr.No.

                                                                   3
      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT JAMMU


                                           OWP no. 778/2015

                                           Reserved on   : 16.11.2022
                                           Pronounced on : 23 .11.2022

Romesh Chander and others                                     ..... Petitioner(s)

                     Through: Mr. R K S Thakur, Advocate


                Vs

State of Jammu & Kashmir and others                         ..... Respondent(s)

                     Through: Mr. R S Jamwal, AAG

Coram:    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
                                 JUDGMENT

1. The petitioners are Sarpanches of Panchayat Halqa Jakhed, Dudu,

Panchoud-1, Panchoud-2 and Panchayat Halqa Chappar and have filed this

petition jointly seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents not to

shift the headquarter of CD Block Latti-Marothi from Jakhed to Latti or any

other place.

2. The case set up by the petitioners is that some years back, having

regard to the hilly terrain and the geography of the area, the Government of

Jammu & Kashmir sanctioned a CD Block known as Dudo-Basantgarh with

headquarter at village Jakhed. He submitted that Jakhed was chosen to be the

headquarter of Dudo-Bastantgarh Block in view of its location. Being a

headquarter of Block, there has been large scale development in Village

Jakhed since September 1979.

2 OWP no. 778/2015

3. The Government of Jammu & Kashmir vide its Order no. Rev (S) 169

of 2014 dated 18.07.2014 created 135 Tehsils and in the process new Tehsil,

namely, Latti-Marothi was carved out from the erstwhile Tehsil Ramnagar.

New Tehsil Latti-Marothi consists of nine different villages including Latti,

Latti-Marothi and Jakhed. The Village Latti has been sanctioned as the

headquarter of the new Tehsil Latti-Marothi.

4. It is submitted that the Government vide its order no. 222/RD & PR of

2014 dated 23.07.2014 created 177 new Community Development Blocks (CD

blocks) in different districts of the State. Amongst others, one CD Block by the

name of Latti-Marothi was also created. The CD Block Latti-Marothi is

comprised of 9 Panchayat Halqas, which are part of Tehsil Latti-Marothi. The

grievance of the petitioners is that though the Jakhed with requisite

infrastructure continues to be the central and convenient place for locating the

headquarter of the CD block Latti-Marothi, yet the respondents are

contemplating to establish the CD Block headquarter at Latti.

5. It is submitted that establishment of headquarter of CD Block Latti-

Marothi at Latti would put a large portion of population of CD block to

inconvenience. He submitted that Jakhed being a central place and having

requisite infrastructure, is the place best suited for establishment of

headquarter of CD block Latti-Marothi.

6. The petitioners claim that they approached the district administration

and other parties with their grievance but nobody is ready to listen to their

genuine problems and, therefore, the instant petition.

3 OWP no. 778/2015

7. On being put on notice, respondents have filed two sets of objections.

In the objections filed by the Deputy Commissioner, Udhampur, stand taken

by the Deputy Commissioner is that the headquarter of new CD Block Latti-

Marothi has been decided and notified by the Department of Rural

Development and Panchayati Raj vide SRO-406-A dated 13.10.2014 and,

therefore, he has no jurisdiction to change the same.

8. In the another set of objections filed by the Department of Rural

Development and Panchayati Raj, it is submitted that with a view to bring

administration closure to the people and to meet the quality of administration-

decision making at the cutting-edge level, the erstwhile State Cabinet

constituted a Cabinet Sub-Committee to recommend new administrative units

like Sub-Divisions, Tehsils Niabats and CD blocks in the State.

9. The Sub-Committee submitted its report and in the light whereof the

erstwhile State Cabinet took a policy decision to create new administrative

units in the State vide Government Order no. 222- RD & PR of 2014 dated

23.07.2014. Amongst others, a new CD Block Latti-Marothi in District

Udhampur was also created. Subsequently, in the exercise of powers conferred

under clause (a) and (i) of sub-section (1) of Section 2 of Jammu and Kashmir

Panchayati Raj Act, 1989 and in partial modifications of all notifications

issued on the subject, the Department of Rural Development and Panchayati

Raj issued notification vide SRO-406-A dated 13.10.2014, to determine the

composition of all the 177 CD blocks. Panchayat Halqa Chappar, Dudu, 4 OWP no. 778/2015

Jakhed, Latti, Marothi, Panchound no. 1, Panchound no. 2, Pattangharh and

Sira have been included in CD block Latti-Marothi with headquarter at Latti.

10. The petitioners have not called in question SRO-406-A dated

13.10.2014 which is statutory in character. Lastly, the respondents in their

objections submit that creation of Tehsils, Niabats and Blocks etc., and

decision with regard to location of their respective headquarters fall in the

realm of policy decision to be taken by the Government. No individual or

individuals can dictate the choice of location of headquarter to the

Government.

11. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material

on record, I am of the considered view that petitioners have not placed on

record enough material from where it could be inferred that in the matter of

selection of headquarter of CD Block Latti-Marothi, the respondents have

acted arbitrarily or irrationally or to the inconvenience of the residents of the

Block.

12. Indisputably, the petitioners have not come to this Court in the

representative capacity and, therefore, they cannot be said to be representatives

of the entire population of CD Block Latti-Marothi. Petitioner nos. 1 to 4 are

former Sarpanches of Panchayat Halqas which are in the near vicinity of

Village Jakhed and, therefore, have vested interest to see that the headquarter

of the CD Block comes at Jakhed.

13. I am in agreement with learned counsel for the respondents that such

matters like creation of new Sub-Divisions, Tehsils and Niabats and Blocks 5 OWP no. 778/2015

and the areas to be included therein as also the fixation of their headquarters

fall purely in the realm of public policy. It is trite law that the policy decisions

of the Government are not to be readily interfered with by the Courts unless a

clear case of arbitrariness and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of

India is established.

13. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that Jakhed is a

centrally located place and, therefore, more suitable for establishing the

headquarter of the CD Block and its denial by the respondents, raises a

complicate disputed question of fact which cannot be determined by this Court

in the exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction. That apart, this Court is bereft

of requisite expertise to determine which of the two locations would be better

suited for running the administration of the CD Block.

14. This Court is also not convinced that the headquarter of a Tehsil or a

Block is to be located at the geographical centre of such Tehsil or Block. There

are numerous factors which are to be considered by the administration before

taking a decision with regard to the location of the headquarter. In the instant

case, the matter was entrusted to a Cabinet Sub-Committee and it is on the

basis of recommendations of the Sub-Committee, the Government not only

created new administrative units like Sub-Divisions, Tehsils and Niabats and

CD Blocks but also determined their headquarters. An SRO in this regard was

also issued in the year 2014 on 13.10.2014, which is statutory in nature.

15. SRO-406-A dated 13.10.2014 provides for the creation of CD Block

Latti-Marothi with headquarter at Latti. This has remained unchallenged by 6 OWP no. 778/2015

anyone including the petitioners herein. That apart, as is taken note of

hereinabove, that the petitioners are only five in number and, therefore, cannot

be said to be the representatives of the entire population of the CD Block. Nor

the petitioners have placed on record any material which could justify the

indulgence of this Court to set aside the policy decision of the Government and

direct the shifting of headquarter of CD Block from Latti to Jakhed.

16. This Court, in the exercise of writ jurisdiction, does not sit in appeal

over the administrative decisions of the Government and, therefore, cannot

weigh comparative merits and demerits in the matter of location of Block

headquarters. To reiterate, the decision to locate the headquarters of a District,

Sub Division, Tehsil, Niabat or CD Block at a particular village/place is

dependent upon various factors. Simply because a particular village is

geographically located in the middle is no ground to necessarily fix the

headquarter at such place. Anyway, these are the matters which should be best

left to the decision of the administrative authorities who, in view of the data

available to them, are well-equipped to make right choice. Unless such

decision of the authority is found to be mala fide, irrational and an outcome of

total non-application of mind, this Court cannot step in to direct the authorities

to reconsider their decisions.

17. Viewed from any angle, this Court finds no merit in this petition and

the same is, accordingly, dismissed. It is, however, made clear that dismissal of

this writ petition shall not come in the way of the petitioners to approach the

competent authority with the requisite material to persuade such authority to 7 OWP no. 778/2015

fall in line with them. Nor the dismissal of this petition shall come in the way

of the authority concerned to take an appropriate decision in the matter to

subserve the interest of administration.

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Jammu 23 .11.2022 Sahil Toga

Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No