Directive on court cases

The Government of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir has taken a significant step to address issues related to contempt proceedings and irregular appointments. The observation is that the government has been facing embarrassment due to contempt petitions and unfavourable court orders, primarily stemming from the negligence of certain officers in various departments who failed to handle court judgements and directions appropriately. The fact is that despite previous instructions to implement court judgements and directions diligently, the situation hasn’t improved to the desired level.
There are a significant number of pending contempt proceedings against various government departments in Jammu and Kashmir. Contempt proceedings signify that these departments are not complying with court directives, which is an undesirable situation for any administration. The Chief Secretary has appropriately issued strict instructions for government departments to take court cases seriously and to take necessary actions based on merit. It has become a common occurrence for departments to submit delayed responses, with some responses being delayed by several months, which is unjustifiable under any circumstances. While courts typically exercise flexibility with timelines, they have now observed that this has become a routine issue, resulting in rejected filings. This is an embarrassing situation for the administration, indicating a lack of coordination between departments and their legal teams. Granting leniency for unjustified delays would run counter to the public interest. It is crucial to emphasise that, in the eyes of the law, equality prevails, and rules and regulations must be applied impartially to government departments just as they are to individuals. The administration bears the responsibility of promptly addressing court cases, as pending legal matters can pose significant obstacles to development and decisions made in the best interests of the citizens. This backlog can have far-reaching implications for various aspects of governance, spanning from employee promotions to substantial infrastructure projects. Despite the administration’s issuance of numerous notifications stressing the importance of resolving court cases promptly, it appears that some departments and legal teams are not treating these directives with the seriousness they deserve.
The High Court has recently issued a stern warning to government departments regarding unwarranted legal disputes. The court expressed “deep concern” over the rising number of frivolous cases initiated by government departments in the court, which is contributing to a backlog of cases and causing delays in delivering justice to legitimate litigants. The administration has to respond with a strong commitment to addressing all these issues. The Chief Secretary has directed all government departments to identify and commence inquiries into officers who are accountable for contempt proceedings arising from their insufficient submissions in court. Moreover, in instances where adverse court rulings are the consequence of these officers’ lackadaisical attitudes, they may be subject to disciplinary actions, with their behaviour being recorded in their Annual Performance Reports (APRs).
Effective communication and guidance to the standing counsels of departments are essential, as they cannot proceed independently without proper input and instructions. Consequently, responses are not filed in court, leading to adverse court rulings. In certain cases, top officials of departments have been directed to appear in court in person, a situation that is far from ideal and should be avoided. It is indeed concerning that, despite having adequate staff and legal teams within the departments, there are delays in taking appropriate action. There can be no valid justification for the delayed or inadequate responses being submitted, which then result in unfavourable comments from the courts.
This situation needs to be promptly resolved to prevent its recurrence in the future. Directives from the highest authorities have been issued, emphasising that government departments must take court proceedings seriously and handle pending cases with careful consideration. There is no alternative to engaging in judicial proceedings, and therefore, thorough preparation and advanced information sharing with concerned offices are imperative for prompt and effective actions.