Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, Dec 30: The appointment of Ombudsman for the Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) has hit yet another road-block as the latest panel doesn’t meet the criteria laid down under the Jammu and Kashmir Municipal Ombudsman Act, 2010 and Housing and Urban Development Department has decided to write a detailed note to the Law Department about the shortcomings in the latest as well as other panels recommended till date.
Official sources told EXCELSIOR that during the detailed scrutiny of the latest seven member panel recommended by the Law Department, the Housing and Urban Development Department has found that majority of the names don’t meet the eligibility criteria laid down under the Act.
The latest panel recommended by the Law Department to the Housing and Urban Development Department is comprised of five Retired District and Sessions Judges namely D C Sagotra, J K Pandita, Mohd Nazir Fida, Sheikh Altaf Hussain and Gaussunisa and two Advocates namely Syed Mohd Sharief Geelani and Shamima.
The laid down criteria states that Governor shall, on the advice of the Chief Minister, appoint a person as Ombudsman provided that a person shall not be qualified to be appointed as Ombudsman unless he has been a Judge of the High Court or is eligible to be appointed as Judge of the High Court. “How come the Law Department considers five retired District and Sessions Judges as eligible for the post of Ombudsman despite very clear eligibility criteria is a million dollar question”, sources said.
“No doubt the other two names in the panel—Advocates Syed Mohd Sharief Geelani and Shamima fall in the criteria but the Housing and Urban Development Department is of the opinion that selection should be made from broad-based panel”, sources said.
About the difficulties in making selection from earlier panel comprising of three former Judges of the High Court and a Senior Advocate, sources said, “this panel was also framed by the Law Department without having serious look at the provisions of the Act”.
Stating that the shortcomings in this panel were pertaining to the age criteria, sources said, “the former Judges of the High Court, who were recommended by the Law Department, had already crossed the age of 67 years and it was not possible to make selection from them in view of the clearly defined criteria”.
The Act states that the Ombudsman shall hold office for a term of three years from the date on which he enters upon his office and the Ombudsman shall not hold office after he has attained the age of 70 years. “In view of clearly defined provision how the Housing and Urban Development Department could have considered the person who had already crossed 67 years of age and was not in a position to hold the office for three years prior to attaining the age of 70 years”, sources said.
They disclosed that keeping in view the sharp criticism from different quarters about the delay in appointment of Ombudsman, the Housing and Urban Development Department has decided to formally write to the Law Department explaining the shortcomings in the present as well as previous panels.
“Had the Law Department strictly adhered to the provisions of the J&K Municipal Ombudsman Act, 2010, the Ombudsman for the Urban Local Bodies would have been appointed till date”, sources said, adding “even the Housing and Urban Development Department cannot absolve itself of delay in appointment of Ombudsman as its officers should have pointed out the shortcomings in the first panel, which was submitted by the Law Department earlier this year”.
However, sources hoped that both the Law Department and Housing and Urban Development Department would ensure proper coordination in future and ensure that Ombudsman is appointed at the earliest.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel