Decided on December 04,2020

Union Territory Of JAndK Respondents


PUNEET GUPTA, J. - (1.)CM No. 4635/2020 : The petitioner has challenged order bearing No. DCK/Suspension-Councillor/2020-2 dated 25.06.2020, passed by respondent No. 5, whereby the petitioner has been suspended from discharging his functions as councilor of Hill Development Council, Kargil. The stay of order impugned as measure of interim relief is sought for by the petitioner. The reply to the petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents.
(2.)The petitioner has been elected as Councillor of Shakar constituency of LAHDC, Kargil. It is pleaded by the petitioner that FIR came to be lodged against the petitioner on false allegations. The bail application filed by the petitioner was allowed by this Court on the ground that prima facie the essential elements of law are not attracted in the present case. The contention raised by the petitioner is that the respondent No. 5 has no power to suspend the petitioner as councillor as per Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Councils, Act (hereinafter called the Act) and therefore the order passed is without jurisdiction. It is further contended that the Act does not provide suspension of councillor from the Council. Despite representation made by the petitioner the revocation of suspension of the petitioner has not taken place which has compelled the petitioner to file the present writ petition.
(3.)In the objections filed by the respondents it is submitted that the executive Council in its meeting held on 20.06.2020 under the Chairmanship of Chief Executive Councillor LAHDC, Kargil suspended the petitioner and suspension order was passed on the recommendation of Chairman/CEO LAHDC. FIR No. 34/2020 was lodged against the petitioner under Sections 124A, 153B, 505(2) and 188 IPC by the police Station, Kargil on the basis of objectionable audio clip containing seditious and proactive conversation and imputation and rumors against the Army stand-off with Chinese Army in Ladakh which was found to be prejudicial to the tranquility and security of the nation. The petitioner was in conversation with one Nisar Hussain in this regard. It is further contended that Section 24 of Jammu and Kashmir Representation of the People Act, 1957 regards disloyalty to the State as one of the grounds for suspension of petitioner under Section 17 of LAHDC Act.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.