‘Expenditure on exercise can be diverted for public welfare’
Asks MHA, J&K UT to take considered decision
Mohinder Verma
JAMMU, May 5: In a major development, High Court of Jammu and Kashmir headed by Chief Justice Gita Mittal has called for review of 148 years old bi-annual Darbar Move practice as the reasons for its introduction are completely irrelevant during the present times. Moreover, it has stated that no grounds are forthcoming for enabling and supporting considerations of administrative efficiency, legal justification or Constitutional basis for continuing the practice which was started way back in 1872.
The High Court has also raised a pertinent question as to whether it is acceptable in a hopelessly fiscally deprived Union Territory with severe underdevelopment and lack of basic facilities for its people to bear ‘unproductive’ expenditure of hundreds of crores of rupees every year on the practice, which is not beneficial even for the employees and their families involved in the exercise.
It has asked the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and Government of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir to take a considered decision after examining the issues raised so that money, resources and time being consumed in the Darbar Move practice could be utilized towards the welfare and development of the Union Territory and protection and propagation of inherent culture and heritage of different communities.
Can any Government afford the annual expenditure of at least Rs 200 crore (as disclosed and many more hundreds of crores of rupees of undisclosed costs) to sustain and perpetuate an arrangement of bi-annual shifting of its capital two times a year, which originated in 1872 from the discomfort of the then Ruler of Jammu and Kashmir with the harshness of the winter in Kashmir, the Division Bench of the High Court comprising Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Rajesh Oswal has questioned in the 93-pages judgment passed after hearing battery of lawyers through video-conference.
“More so is this acceptable in a hopelessly fiscally deprived Union Territory with severe underdevelopment and people deprived of bare basics which are essential part of their fundamental right of life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India”, the DB has further asked.
Stating that no historical treatise is available giving details of the origin of the Darbar Move, the DB said, “the explanation tendered for this shifting of the capital was to enable the Maharaja to escape the harsh winters of the Kashmir valley which, in the 19th century, used to result in the valley being cut off from the outside the world”, adding “clearly, public interest, lending efficiency to administration or facility of governance was no part of the reason of the decision for shifting of the capital”.
“However, since 1872 when the arrangement of the Darbar Move was effectuated, much has changed. The discomfort on account of change of weather in either city, is, today compensated by efficient and modern environment control mechanism in both Jammu as well as Srinagar”, the DB said, adding “it could also very well be urged that in 1872, the journey of 300 kilometres between Jammu and Srinagar, used to be long and arduous. But this has also changed”.
The DB observed, “at present Jammu and Srinagar are connected to each other and the rest of the country by a well used National Highway which is kept in good repair around the year. There is even a railway line between Banihal and Baramulla. It appears that the ongoing expansion of the railway network shall soon expand the railway facility from Jammu all the way to Baramulla”. Moreover, both Jammu and Srinagar are also extremely well connected by air service with each other as well as with remote corners of the country.
“Therefore, though the original rationale remains in principle-winters in Srinagar continue to be cold and summers remain hot in Jammu, however, the circumstances have completely changed and there is little weight in that principle any more. It is clearly logical that the consideration of extreme weather in support of the Darbar Move does not hold weight today”, the DB further said, adding “despite changed circumstances, the biannual practice continues, which entails a crippling disruption of working of large number of departments and High Court for several weeks”.
Quoting the facts placed before it, the DB said, “the disregard of public interest in its origins and implementation, its adverse effects, the huge fiscal, social and economic costs, amply manifest that its propriety, feasibility and efficacy of the arrangement is one such matter overlooked and forgotten”, adding “it is a matter of concern that the issue, its objective, need, efficiency, feasibility, desirability, impact on administration, governance and public interest have never engaged the attention of the concerned and competent authorities”.
“Our judicial conscience compels us to “ring the bell” else we would fail in discharging our judicial duty or to perform our Constitutional function as demanded in the interest of the nation and the people of Jammu and Kashmir”, the judgment written by the Chief Justice said, adding “we hasten to add that conscious of the limitations of our jurisdiction, we shall confine ourselves to “ringing the bell” without anything more”.
Stating that Darbar Move deprives both the regions of six months of the administrative machinery, the DB said that as a result of shifting of the complete Secretariat with all records from one city to the other as part of the Darbar Move there is no mechanism of relief or redressal left in the region from where the Darbar moves.
“As a result of the Darbar moving in the summer to Srinagar, people living in some areas of the Jammu province would have to travel long distances for solution of petty problems”, the DB said, adding “the residents of the villages of Dachhan, Paddar, Marwah in the Kishtwar district have to travel more than 400 kms, someone from Basohli, Bani in Kathua district to travel between 450-500 kms in seeking resolution of their problems from the administration located in Srinagar”.
Similarly in the winter months, a person from Gurez in the Bandipora district, having an issue with the administration, would have to travel some 500 kms over difficult terrain to reach Jammu. A resident of Tangdhar and Teetwar in Kupwara district would similarly travel 400 kms. “This would only add to the distress of the people who are completely deprived of access to the administration for six months at a time”, the DB said.
The DB has noted with concern that the Darbar Move have the effect of disruption of the scheduled completion of important administrative assignments. “It definitely impedes monitoring of Government projects as records get packed and sealed in trunks. A cursory examination of the report card of the several projects, including mega infrastructure and construction projects makes out consequential delays in decision making and resultant increase in costs. This is the direct outcome of the disruption of the administration”, the DB added.
“Given the inability to secure basic fundamental rights and huge gaps in the basic facilities to the people of Jammu and Kashmir; levels of unemployment, illiteracy and poverty in the Union Territory, it is questionable as to whether the divergence of valuable financial resources on pursuing the practice of the Darbar Move can be justified, especially keeping in view its adverse impact on public interest”, the DB said.
Stating that J&K is a fiscally constrained UT and cannot afford the expenditure on the Darbar Move, the DB, while quoting the official figures, pointed out that UT has projected a budget of over Rs 1,00,000 crore. But it is able to generate revenues of less than Rs 13,000 crore therefore it largely depends for its funds on the Government of India, grants and loans to the tune of around Rs 90,000 crore”, adding “these would show that Jammu and Kashmir is able to barely generate approximately 12% of its expenditure”.
With these observations, the DB has concluded that no reasons or grounds are forthcoming for enabling and supporting considerations of administrative efficiency, legal justification or Constitutional basis for affecting the Darbar Moves, adding “Jammu as well as the Srinagar regions equally require administration and governance round the year without interruption. It is unfair and opposed to public interest to deprive either region completely of access to Government machinery for six months at a time”.
Stating that justification of Darbar Move has lost all relevance, the DB further said that for a period of almost six weeks annually, the entire governance and administration in the Union Territory comes to a grinding halt creating a governance deficit. “The sensitivity of the issues with which the Union Territory Government is engaged can ill afford this gap in governance. This is glaringly opposed to every element of public interest”, the High Court added.
On account of technological advancements and availability of electronic modes, maintenance of record and communication, there is no need for physical conveyance of assets, High Court said, adding information technology integrates disjoint units into single units virtually. Therefore, even if the Secretariat and Departments were divided and placed at different locations, they could be virtually unified into a single Secretariat with minimal movement of human resources.
Accordingly, DB has directed that the judgment be served upon the Secretary, Union Ministry of Home Affairs and Chief Secretary of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir with the direction to place the same before the competent authorities for examining the issues raised and taking a considered decision thereon.
“We have recorded our reasons and judgment on several aspects which arise on account of the implementation of the Darbar Move including Constitutional and legal implications and consequences thereof. We have also noted the limitations on the extent of our jurisdiction as such we defer this task to the best wisdom of those on whom the Constitution of India bestows this solemn duty keeping in view, the interest of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, the larger interest of its people and the mandate of the Constitution of India”, the DB has concluded.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
