Amid COVID-19 scare the Narendra Modi government at the centre is enforcing more and more provocative decisions against the very spirit of return of statehood to the erstwhile Jammu & Kashmir state without changing the Union Territory status of Ladhak. The latest provocative decision announced by the Modi Government is the extension of jurisdiction of Chandigarah bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) to Jammu & Kashmir in case of the service matters of over five lakh employees of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladhak Union Territories. The public outrage triggered by the announcement has though forced Minister of Sate (MoS) in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) Jitenddra Singh to clarify that the Chandigarah bench of the central administrative tribunal (CAT) will hold frequent sittings in Jammu & Kashmir for hearing the service matters of the Jammu & Kashmir government employees but the same is not satisfying keeping in view the critical statements of the J&K Government’s employee associations, heads of lawyers bodies of Jammu and Chairman of Kargil Autonomous Hill Development Council (KAHDC). While the J&K Employees Joint Consultative Committee (J&K EJCC) has demanded a separate bench of central administrative tribunal for Jammu & Kashmir with operations on the pattern of the shuttling of top government offices between Srinagar and Jammu after every six months, the Chairman Kargil Autonomous Hill Development Council (KAHDC) has written a formal letter to Ladhak Lieutenant Governor R K Mathur to demand a separate bench of central administrative tribunal in Ladhak. Forget about the critical responses of Kashmir to the controversial decision on extension of the jurisdiction of Chandigarah bench of central administrative tribunal on service matters to Jammu & Kashmir, the responses from even Jammu are more critical than of the employees associations of Kashmir. Former Jammu Bar Association president B.S. Slathia says” there should be a separate bench for Jammu and Kashmir, with members in Jammu, Srinagar and Ladakh. There is only one member at the Chandigarh bench. Will he sit in Chandigarh, Jammu, Srinagar or Ladakh? What I have heard is that the bench is hearing only 1,200 cases there. Another 40,000 cases of J&K and Ladakh will get added to it. Is it humanely possible to hear so many cases? They (Centre) have taken the decision in haste and have taken advantage of the lockdown as people will not come out (to protest).” Echoing him Kathua Bar Association president Ajat Shatru Sharma says “how the Chandigarh bench would do justice to nearly five lakh government employees in Jammu and Kashmir” “They (Centre) have promised to restore our statehood. But why are they making permanent changes?” Amid demands and counter demands from Jammu & Kashmir and Ladhak, the central government’s Press Information Bureau (PIB) in a firefight attempt issued a statement which said “neither the petitioner nor the lawyer need to go to Chandigarh for filling petitioner appearing (for filing petitions) before the tribunal related to service matters of employees. The term Chandigarh circuit is being misinterpreted to mean that the petitioner/lawyer would have to go to Chandigarh, which is not so. All service matters of Central Government and UT employees of J&K and Ladakh will be heard and disposed off in CAT bench in J&K itself”. Even MoS In PMO Jitendra Singh had to retract from his statement as he said “GoI shifts all service matters of employees of J&K & Ladakh UTs to Chandigarh CAT that appeared in a local newspapers today was fake. Beware of fake news peddlers. All service matters of central government and UT employees of J&K and Ladakh will be heard and disposed off in CAT bench in J&K.” However clarifications don’t douse the flames of anger as the public outrage amid COVID-19 scare is not heading to any dead end.
Not only from Kashmir but from Jammu as well the Modi government’s controversial decisions are fueling unending anger over the way permanent decisions are taken against the spirit of the Home Minister Amit Shah’s promise of return of state hood to Jammu & Kashmir. So better it would be for the central government to withdraw it’s decision on extension of jurisdiction of CAT’s chandigarah bench to Jammu & Kashmir and desist from imposing such controversial decisions till the restoration of state and return of popular rule.
Since the J&K Government has not abolished J&K Administrative Tribunal working since last several decades post article 370 abrogation and bifurcation of erstwhile state into two union territories, the government has to either abolish the J&K administrative tribunal or change its nomenclature to make it institutionally subservient to central administrative tribunal for hearing the service related matters of the J&K Government employees. Conceding the demands of a separate administrative tribunal won’ end intensifying resentment against the Modi government as public rising outrage against the government over the return of statehood is not heading to any dead end. Not only from Kashmir but from Jammu as well the Modi government’s controversial decisions are fueling unending anger over the way permanent decisions are taken against the spirit of the Home Minister Amit Shah’s promise of return of state hood to Jammu & Kashmir. So better it would be for the central government to withdraw it’s decision on extension of jurisdiction of CAT’s chandigarah bench to Jammu & Kashmir and desist from imposing such controversial decisions till the restoration of state and return of popular rule.
Since the J&K Government has not abolished J&K Administrative Tribunal working since last several decades post article 370 abrogation and bifurcation of erstwhile state into two union territories, the government has to either abolish the J&K administrative tribunal or change its nomenclature to make it institutionally subservient to central administrative tribunal for hearing the service related matters of the J&K Government employees. Conceding the demands of a separate administrative tribunal won’ end intensifying resentment against the Modi government as public rising outrage against the government over the return of statehood is not heading to any dead end. Not only from Kashmir but from Jammu as well the Modi government’s controversial decisions are fueling unending anger over the way permanent decisions are taken against the spirit of the Home Minister Amit Shah’s promise of return of state hood to Jammu & Kashmir. So better it would be for the central government to withdraw it’s decision on extension of jurisdiction of CAT’s chandigarah bench to Jammu & Kashmir and desist from imposing such controversial decisions till the restoration of state and return of popular rule.
