Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Wednesday, December 4, 2024

Have Not Come Across Any Such Legislative State Action Legitimizing Criminal Activity: J&K HC Holds Roshni Act Unconstitutional

Posted in: Constitutional Law
Wed, Oct 14, 20, 11:23, 4 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 4224
Prof. S.K. Bhalla v/s J & K the Roshni Act to be unconstitutional.

In a latest, landmark, learned and extremely laudable judgment titled Prof. S.K. Bhalla v/s State of J & K and others in IA No. 48/2014 & CM Nos 4036, 4065 of 2020 in PIL No. 19/2011 delivered on October 9, 2020 through video conferencing from Srinagar, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court has held the Roshni Act to be unconstitutional.

It minced no words to hold that the Jammu and Kashmir State Land (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act, 2001 which is popularly known as the Roshni Act is completely unconstitutional and all acts done under it or amendments thereunder are also unconstitutional and void ab initio. The Bench comprising the Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Rajesh Bindal directed CBI investigation into allegations against Ministers, legislators, bureaucrats, high ranking Government and police officials for having encroached upon public lands and having caused orders passed under the Roshni Act in their favour. Very rightly so!

Before stating anything else, it is remarked in this judgment authored by Chief Justice Gita Mittal for herself and Justice Rajesh Bindal that, IA No. 48/2014

25. The Public Trust Doctrine primarily rests on the principle that certain resources like air, sea, waters and the forest have such a great importance to the people as a whole that it would be wholly unjust to make them a subject of private ownership. The said resources being a gift of nature, they should be made freely available to everyone irrespective of the status in life. The doctrine enjoins upon the Government to protect the resources for the enjoyment of the general public rather than to permit their use for private ownership or commercial purposes. According to Professor Sax the Public Trust Doctrine imposes the following restrictions on government authority:

Three types of restrictions on governmental authority are often though to be imposed by the public trust: first, the property subject to the trust must not only be used for a public purpose, but it must be held available for use by the general public; second, the property may not be sold, even for a fair cash equivalent; and third property must be maintained in particular types of uses.

34. Our legal system – based on English Common Law – includes the public trust doctrine as part of its jurisprudence. The State is the trustee of all natural resources which are by nature meant for public use and enjoyment. Public at large is the beneficiary of the sea-shore, running waters, airs, forests and ecologically fragile lands. The State as a trustee is under a legal duty to protect the natural resources. These resources meant for public use cannot be converted into private ownership.

(Ref: (1997) 1 SCC 3880 M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath).

To start with, this notable judgment authored by Chief Justice Gita Mittal for herself and Justice Rajesh Bindal of Jammu and Kashmir High Court brilliantly and boldly sets the ball rolling by first and foremost pointing out in para 1 that, The instant case manifests the actual implementation of the age old adage that charity begins at home, not for the homeless, the landless, the labourer, the beggar or those without any source of income, but practiced by the powerful, the high and mighty, the rich who committed trespass on huge tracts of public land (including forests), and have acquired proprietary rights over them, not because of need, but out of sheer greed, completely unconcerned about the resultant damage to the national and public interest.

In a sharp rebuff to the Make hay while sun shines culture, the Bench then holds in para 2 that,:
It could perhaps be said that acquisition of property is a natural aspiration of every human being but certainly not dishonest acquisition premised in the criminal offence of trespass committed on State lands held in public trust by the Government. In fact, the implementation of this adage, as is manifested in the present case, tantamount to implementation of a loot to own policy. That these looters could motivate a legislation to facilitate their nefarious design, by itself speaks about their insidious and deep penetration into the corridors of power and authority; about the level and scale of their influence at all levels and suggests involvement of all those who mattered including in propounding and implementation of the policy.

In a rare and candid admission, the Bench then concedes in para 3 that, We have not come across any such legislative state action legitimizing criminal activity at the cost of national and public interest with incalculable loss and damage to the public exchequer and the environment, without any financial (or other) impact assessment.

More damningly, the Bench then elucidates in para 4 holding that,:
What is even more shocking is that despite a citizen of the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir raising this issue by virtue of public interest litigation filed nine years ago in 2011 by way of the present PIL no. 19/2011 and another in the year 2014, their pleas for justice to the people of Jammu and Kashmir have fallen completely on the deaf ears of the official respondents. The bureaucracy and Government officials are enjoying huge salaries and benefits for their acts of omission and commission each of which tantamount to a penal offence and have thus actively encouraged usurpations of public lands. Those in power, authority and the respondents have completely failed to discharge their constitutional functions, their statutory duties and public law obligations towards the public to whom they owe their very existence.

While elaborating on the facts of the present case, it is then envisaged in para 5 that:
In this writ petition filed in public interest nine years ago in 2011, the present application was filed by the petitioner five and a half years ago as back as on 13th March 2014 submitting that a multi crore Roshni land scam unearthed by the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) for the ending year 31st March 2013, was required to be handed over to the CBI so that the matter could be thoroughly investigated and appropriate prosecutions be effected under the Jammu and Kashmir Prevention of Corruption Act and under Section 17 of the Jammu and Kashmir State Land (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act 2001 to be undertaken.

As is quite ostensible, the Bench then as anticipated holds in para 6 that:
In order to understand the above prayer, it is necessary to consider the unique legislative activity in the erstwhile State of Jammu & Kashmir.

Delving deeper, the Bench then lays down in para 7 that:
On 9th of November, 2001, the Jammu and Kashmir State Land (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act 2001 received the assent of the Governor which was published in the Government Gazette on 13th November, 2001. The Statement of Objects and Reasons for the enactment shocks the conscience of this Court and, therefore, is reproduction in extenso as under:

Whereas most of the State land stands encroached upon and is the purpose for which it was reserved at the time of regular settlement. These lands have either come under various types of construction or plantations including orchards. The eviction of these lands is very difficult if not impossible because of the procedure established under law whereunder an encroacher has to be given an opportunity of being heard before he is evicted.

Moreover, the encroachers are entitled to file an appeal, review, revision and thereby the State will be involved in protracted litigation and ultimately no substantial achievement shall be made in removing the encroachments. The removal of encroachment en-block will also lead to mass unrest.

In view of the above, the Hon'ble Finance Minister proposed the scheme called Roshni in his Budget Speech 2000 whereunder it was suggested that the Proprietary Rights be given to the persons holding unauthorisedly till 1990 on payment of the cost equivalent to the prevailing market rate of the year 1990.

No wonder, it is then held in para 8 that:
As a result of the above, the said enactment is referred to in common parlance as the 'Roshni Act'. We shall also so refer to this enactment hereafter.

Be it noted, the Bench then minces no words in stating in para 17 that:
It appears that the Revenue Department made J & K State Land (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Rules, 2007 in purported exercise of power under Section 18 of the Roshni Act which came to be published in the Official Gazette as SRO 64 dated 5th May, 2007. It seems that no approval of these Rules was sought from the legislature and they were unauthorizedly published in Government Gazette. Again in a shocking illegality, these rules were in excess of the powers conferred by the Statute and in contradiction with the prohibitions contained therein.

What is worse is as stated in para 18 that:
This is done despite the mandate of the Constitution and the law laid down by the Supreme Court. Government officials had the gumption and absolute arrogance to publish rules which did not have the clearance of the legislature speaks volumes about the influence of the beneficiaries thereof.

To put things in perspective, the key point of what is then stated in para 42 is that:
Before dealing with this application, few background facts are necessary. A writ petition in public interest which was registered as PIL No. 19/201, was filed by Prof. S.K. Bhalla on 17th August 2011, an academician and then a Principal of the Government Degree College, Mendhar pointing out to allegations of land grabbing leveled against influential people including police officers, politicians and bureaucrats occupying responsible positions in the Erstwhile J & K State in connivance with land mafia, making the prayer for constitution of an SIT and seeking appropriate criminal, disciplinary and other actions against those guilty. It is also stated that the writ petitioner referred to specific instances of land grabbing in Paras 18 to 20 of the writ petition but due to paucity of space it is not possible to elaborate them in detail here.

Finally and far most importantly, the Bench then concludes in the final para 119 by observing that:
In view of the above, we direct as follows:

  1. The Commissioner/Secretary to Government Revenue Department, shall ensure that following information regarding district wise State lands as on 1st January, 2001, are compiled and posted on the official website as well as the NIC website:
    1. The details of the State land which was in illegal and unauthorized occupation of person(s)/entities with full identity of encroachers and particulars of the land.
    2. The details of:
      1. the applications received under the Roshni Act, 2001;
      2. the valuation of the land;
      3. the amounts paid by the beneficiary;
      4. the orders passed under the Roshni Act; and
      5. the persons in whose favour the vesting was done and also further transfers, if any, recognized and accepted by the authorities.
    3. Complete identities of all influential persons (including ministers, legislators, bureaucrats, government officials, police officers, businessmen etc.) their relatives or persons holding Benami for them, who have derived benefit under the Roshni Act, 2001/Roshni Rules 2007 and/or occupy State lands.
       
  2. The Divisional Commissioners, Jammu as well as Kashmir, shall place on record district-wise full details of the encroached State land not covered by the Roshni Act, Rules, Scheme(s), order(s) which continues to be under illegal occupation; the full identity and particulars of the land and person(s)/entities encroaching the same. The Revenue Secretary shall ensure that this information is also posted on the website of the respondents within four weeks.
     
  3. The Secretary Revenue, Govt. of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir shall furnish the above information with copies of the supporting records to the CBI in the digitized format, and, if requested, hard copies thereof be also provided, within four weeks. The same shall be filed on court record as well.
  4. Translation of records, wheresoever required, shall be expeditiously ensured by the concerned Deputy Commissioner from the Tehsildars and provided to CBI within one week of the need being noticed/informed.
  5. In case, the above directions are not complied with, the Secretary Revenue and the Divisional Commissioners of Jammu and Kashmir shall be held liable and proceeded against for Contempt of Court.
  6. The present order be placed before the Director, CBI, who shall appoint teams of officers not below the ranks of Superintendents of Police assisted by other officers to conduct an in depth inquiry in the matters which are the subject matter of this order. On conclusion of the inquiry, the CBI shall register case(s) in accordance with law against the person(s) found culpable, proceed with the investigation(s) as well as prosecution(s) thereof.
  7. The Anti Corruption Bureau shall place before the Director, CBI, the closure report in FIR 6/2019 filed on 4th July, 2019 before the Special Judge (Anti-Corruption Judge, Jammu) as well as a copy of the order dated 4th December, 2019 passed thereon by the Special Judge, Jammu.
  8. The Anti Corruption Bureau of the Union Territory of J & K shall place complete records of all matters regarding land encroachment/Roshni Act or Rules being enquired into or cases investigated into by it, before the CBI which shall proceed with the further inquiries and investigations therein in accordance with law.
  9. In all cases in which charge sheets stand filed by the Anti Corruption Bureau in the Courts, the CBI shall conduct further and thorough investigation, and, if necessary file additional charge sheets in those cases.
  10. In cases pending for accord of sanction for prosecution before the Anti Corruption Bureau or the Competent Authority, the records thereof shall be placed before the CBI for examination. These cases shall be thoroughly further examined, investigated by the CBI and the matter for accord of sanction of prosecution against all persons found by the CBI as involved in the offences, shall be proceeded with, in accordance with law.
  11. The CBI shall immediately inquire into the three instances at Serial Nos. A, B, C above (paragraph nos. 54 to 82); the matters pointed out in CMs 4036/2020, CM 4065/2020 and all instances of vesting under the Roshni Act and encroachment of State lands by influential persons as above in the details provided by the authorities and proceed further in these cases in accordance with law.
  12. The CBI shall also inquire into the continued encroachments on state lands; illegal change of ownership/use; grant of licences on encroached State lands; misuse of the land in violation of the permitted user; raising of illegal constructions; failure of the authorities to take action for these illegalities; fix the responsibility and culpability of the persons who were at the helm of affairs, who were duty bound to and responsible for taking action; their failure to proceed in accordance with law against the illegalities and instead have permitted/compounded the same, as also any other illegality which is revealed during the course of the enquiry wheresoever.
  13. The CBI shall specifically inquire into the matter of publication of the Roshni Rules, 2007 without the assent of the Legislature. If this is found true, the CBI shall identify the persons responsible who have illegally and dishonestly published the same and proceed in the matter for their criminal liability.
  14. The Principal Secretary, Revenue, Vice Chairman JDA and all other authorities from whom information is required by the CBI shall efficiently and expeditiously furnish all records and information to the CBI. Failure on the part of any Government authority to do so shall render them liable for appropriate departmental action apart from inviting criminal prosecution.
  15. We grant liberty to the petitioner in PIL No. 19/2011 and Ankur Sharma, the petitioner in PIL No. 41/2014; the applicants in CM 4036/2020 and CM 4065/2020 to place all material in their power and possession before the Central Bureau of Investigation. If called upon to do so, they shall render full assistance to the CBI.
  16. The CBI shall file action taken reports every eight weeks in sealed cover before this court in this case.
  17. The Chief Secretary of the Government of the Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir shall monitor the matter and ensure that the inquiry by CBI is not hampered in any manner on account of concealment of documents, records, requisite assistance or cooperation on the part of the official machinery.
  18. Any effort to delay the enquiry by the CBI in any manner should be construed as active connivance by such person(s) with those whose culpability is being investigated.
  19. In view of the above directions, the presence of the applicants in IA Nos. 4036/2020 and 4065/2020 in the present proceedings is completely unnecessary and these applications are disposed of.

These applications are disposed of in the above terms.

No doubt, the most significant impact of this latest, landmark and extremely laudable judgment which has been well-drafted, well-worded, well-reasoned, well-analysed and well-justified is that the Jammu and Kashmir State Land (Vesting of Ownership to the Occupants) Act, 2001 which is popularly known as the Roshni Act is completely unconstitutional and all acts done under it or amendments thereunder are also unconstitutional and void ab initio. It merits no reiteration that CBI investigation has been very rightly directed by the two Judge Bench of Jammu and Kashmir High Court comprising of Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Rajesh Bindal.

 This clearly manifests that the Jammu and Kashmir High Court is very serious about this whole issue and wants to get to the bottom of it as there are very serious allegations against ministers, legislators, bureaucrats, high ranking government and police officials for having encroached upon public lands and having caused orders passed under the Roshni Act in their favour.

The language used by the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in this judgment is very harsh because there is systematic loot as pointed out in this notable judgment. All those who are involved must be first identified and then investigated properly and all those who are found involved in corrupt misdeeds must be booked and strictly punished in accordance with law at the earliest!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
This article critically analyses the concept of Parliamentary privileges enshrined under Article 105 of the Constitution of India along with various judicial pronouncement.
Here we have two legal systems, one tracing its roots to Roman law and another originating in England or we can say one codified and the other not codified or one following adversarial type of system other inquisitorial or one is continental whereas the other one Anglo-American
The principle of gender equality is enshrined in the Indian Constitution in its Preamble, Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties and Directive Principles.
The constitutional interpretations metamorphose a non-federal constitution into a federal one which results into a shift from reality to a myth
What justice is? and why one wants access to it? are important question which need to be addressed in introductory part of the literature. Justice is a concept of rightness, fairness based on ethics, moral, religion and rationality.
It is not the whole Act which would be held invalid by being inconsistent with Part III of the Constitution but only such provisions of it which are violative of the fundamental rights
Thomas Mann had in 1924 said; a man’s dying is more the survivor’s affair than his own’. Today his words are considered to be true as there is a wide range of debate on legalizing euthanasia.
India became one of 135 countries to make education a fundamental right of every child, when the Parliament passed the 86th Constitutional amendment in 2002.
Following are the salient features of the amended Lokpal bill passed by Parliament:
Good governance is associated with efficient and effective administration in a democratic framework. It is considered as citizen-friendly, citizen caring and responsive administration. Good governance emerged as a powerful idea when multilateral and bilateral agencies like the World Bank, UNDP, OECD, ADB, etc.
A democratic society survives by accepting new ideas, experimenting with them, and rejecting them if found unimportant. Therefore it is necessary that whatever ideas the government or its other members hold must be freely put before the public.
This article describes relationship between Indian Legislative provisions and freedom of press.
This article gives an overview of the Definition of State as per Article 12 Of the Constitution of India with emphasis on Relevant case law
Coming straight to the nub of the matter, The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Bir Singh v Delhi Jal Board held that Pan India Reservation Rule in force in National Capital Territory of Delhi is in accord with the constitutional scheme relating to services under the Union and the States/Union Territories
Jasvinder Singh Chauhan case that denial of passport or its non-renewal without assigning reasons as listed under the Passports Act, 1967 infringes the fundamental rights. who was praying for the renewal of his passport and issuance of a fresh passport to him.
In Indian Young Lawyers Association v/s Kerala has very laudably permitted entry of women of all age groups to the Sabarimala temple, holding that 'devotion cannot be subjected to gender discrimination'. It is one of the most progressive and path breaking judgment that we have witnessed in last many decades just like in the Shayara Bano case
Sadhna Chaudhary v U.P. has upheld the dismissal of a judicial officer on grounds of misconduct, on the basis of two orders passed by her in land acquisition cases. This has certainly sent shockwaves across Uttar Pradesh especially in judicial circles.
The term judiciary refers to the higher officials of the government i.e Judges of all the hierarchy of the courts. The constitution of India gives greater importance to the independence of the Indian judiciary. Every democratic country set up it’s own independent judiciary for the welfare of it’s citizens.
various allowances, perquisites, salaries granted to mp and mla
This article presents a glimpse of human life through the constitutional approach.
Er. K. Arumugam v. V. Balakrishnan In the contempt jurisdiction, the court has to confine itself to the four corners of the order alleged to have been disobeyed
As Parliamentarians, we remain the guardians and protectors of fundamental rights, and always need to ensure we are fulfilling our many responsibilities, as legislators, representatives and role models. to uphold the rights set out in the Declaration, particularly as regards safeguarding political and civil society space.
Kashmiri Sikh Community and others v. J&K has very rightly upheld PM's Employment Package 2009 for Kashmiri Pandits living in the Valley.
The Supreme Court on 12th September stuck down the penal provision of adultery enshrined under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code.
President A. Akeem Raja case it has been made amply clear that, Freedom of religion can't trump demands of public order. Public order has to be maintained at all cost. There can be no compromise on it.
Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghosh who is a former Supreme Court Judge and former Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh High Court who retired in May 2017 and a current member of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) was appointed as India's first Lokpal
colonial era Official Secrets Act (OSA) as many feel that it has far outlived its utility. Before drawing any definite conclusion on such an important issue, we need to certainly analyse this issue dispassionately from a close angle.
Sri Aniruddha Das Vs The State Of Assam held that bandhs / road/rail blockades are illegal and unconstitutional and organizers must be prosecuted.
ABout changes in Changes in Constitutional (Forty-Second) Amendment Act
Definition of State as per Article 12 f the Constitution of India with emphasis on Relevant case law
Justice KS Puttaswamy (Retd) and Anr vs UOI held that right to privacy is a fundamental right.
You want India to defend Kashmir, feed its people, give Kashmiris equal rights all over India. But you want to deny India and Indians all rights in Kashmir. I am a Law Minister of India, I cannot be a party to such a betrayal of national interests.
Faheema Shirin RK Vs State of Kerala and others that right to access internet is a fundamental right forming part of right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
the Supreme Court of UK has gone all guns blazing by categorically and courageously pronouncing in Gilham v Ministry of Justice the whistle-blowing protection envisaged under Employment
The Constitution directs the government that High Court shall have power, throughout in relation to it jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, directions, orders or writs, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose also.
What is child labour ? Why bonded in india?
Shiv Sena And Ors. Vs UOI whether the newly sworn in Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis enjoys majority in the State Assembly or not! This latest order was necessitated after Shiv Sena knocked the doors of the Apex Court along with Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) and Congress.
Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), saying they are two different things. We all saw in different news channels that many people who were protesting did not had even the elementary knowledge of CAA but were protesting vehemently just on the provocation of leaders from different political parties
Sanmay Banerjee v/s. West Bengal in exercise of Constitutional writ jurisdiction on the appellate side has that people have every right to criticize dispensation running the country, being legislature, executive or judiciary
On May 16, 1946 Cabinet Mission Plan arbitrarily announced to group British Indian states in A, B & C categories. Assam was kept in Group C with Bengal, creating a predominantly Muslim zone in Eastern India like the one proposed to be setup in western India.
Top political leaders and Members of Parliament from Left Parties have very often raised the questions of atrocities and accommodation of these minorities even in the Parliament. Unfortunately when this dream of opening the doors of India for her cultural children was about to be realized
Why is it that even after more than 81 days the blocking of road at Shaheen Bagh in Delhi is continuing uninterrupted since 15 December 2019? Why is it that Centre allowed this to happen? Why were they not promptly evicted?
The Basic Structure Of Indian Constitution Or Doctrine Applies During The Time Of Amendments In Constitution Of India. These Basic Structure State That The Government Of India Cann’t Touch Or Destroy
Arjun Aggarwal Vs Union Of India And Anr (stay) dismissed a PIL filed by a petitioner who is a law student. The PIL had challenged the June 30 order of the Ministry of Home Affairs wherein considerable relaxations from lockdown were operationalised under Unlock 1.0
This blog deals explains the Right to Access Internet as a Fundamental Right under Constitution of India and the reasonable restrcitions which it is subject to and whether it can be considered to be a fundamental right or not.
This article talks about what exactly is meant by the doctrine of colourable legislation, how various case laws have come up time and again to reiterate its meaning and how the supreme court views this doctrine. To address legislative transparency for some improvements in the legislative system, colorable legislation is necessary to be studied
Shri Naini Gopal Vs The Union of India and Ors. in Case No. – LD-VC-CW-665 of 2020 has minced no words to hold that: We need to remind the Bank that the pension payable to the employees upon superannuation is a property under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India
Article 25 of the Constitution of India, thus ruled that the immediate family members of Covid-19 victims be permitted to perform the funeral rites of the deceased subject to them following certain precautionary guidelines
Top