The High Court Tuesday asked the government of India and the Jammu and Kashmir government to respond to pleas seeking directions to scrap the state government order banning movement of civilian vehicles along the Jammu-Srinagar national highway on Sunday and Wednesday every week to facilitate movement of security forces.
A division bench of Chief Justice Gita Mittal and JusticeTashi Rabstan issued notices to the Union defence ministry and the unionministry of home affairs through their secretaries and the Union ministry ofsurface transport, National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) and the Jammu andKashmir government.
Assistant solicitor general Tahir Shamsi accepted the noticeon behalf of the union defence and home secretaries, while senior additionaladvocate general B A Dar accepted it on behalf of the J&K government.Advocate SS Kala accepted the notice for the NHAI.
The court issued the notice after hearing the clubbedpetitions of former IAS officer-turned-politician Shah Faesal, NationalConference leader Ali Muhammad Sager, Peoples Democratic Party leader NaeemAkhter, Raja Faisal Zahoor, Shafaqat Nazir and Arif Javid Khan.
Senior advocate Reyaz Jan, on behalf of Raja Faisal Zahoor,submitted that “we all are part of the solution. The pain and anguish of thepeople indispensably requires to be mitigated”. “Peace is correlated tojustice. Once justice is given, peace will come. Everything is for people. Soit has to be all inclusive” he said.
On behalf Shah Feasal, advocate Ehsan Javid underlined theneed for staying the order under challenge as patients, students and dailycommuters are bound to suffer due to it.
“It is so difficult to get permissions so instantly to meetexigencies,” he told the court.
Senior advocate M I Qadri, who appeared on behalf ofNational Conference leader Ali Muhammad Sagar, told the court that there is animmediate need to simplify the procedure for movement of people in emergencysituations.
“How to meet emergent situations is the problem in essence.If a person suffers from heart attack, securing permission by the existingorder would lead to his death before he reaches a hospital. If he dies and thecemetery is located on the national highway, then his burial is a problem,”Qadri told the court.
Senior advocate Jahangir Iqbal Ganai, on behalf of PDPleader Naeem Akhter, submitted that education in hundreds of schools located onthe national highway will suffer.
Patients suffering from terminal diseases cannot reachSrinagar from remote areas of the districts, he said, adding: “We only want tohelp ease problems of the people and are not averse to movement of securityforces”.
“If the movement of the army is made convenient for fivedays, why the same is not possible for rest of the two days? It cannot be donein a mechanical manner,” he said.
Advocate Shafaqat Nazir said the order under challange hasbeen passed not for security of the state but for security of security forceswho, as per media reports, are also not satisfied with the order.
“Therefore, the impugned order is neither good for thesecurity forces nor for general public,” he said.
He further submitted that the order regulating traffic couldhave been passed by the respective district magistrates under section 144 CrPCas per requirement and feasibility.
“Placing blanket ban on movement of people from Udhampur toBaramulla is not in consonance with law,” he pleaded.
After hearing the parties, the court observed that “letevery effort be made by the government for the security of not only thesecurity forces but also the citizens of the state”. While the court directed the respondents tofile affidavit within two weeks, it listed the case for further considerationon April 19.
Meanwhile, the court took on record the order issued bydivisional commissioner Kashmir with regard to civilian movement on thenational highway.