J&K HC Quashes Order Passed by J&K State Human Rights Commission on Grounds of Lack of Jurisdiction

Must Read

US Court Orders Iran To Pay $1.4 BN in Damages To Missing Former FBI Agent’s Family

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered Iran to pay in total $1.45 bn to...

Onus on Petitioner To Show Unassailable Facts: Delhi High Court

In the case of Rhythm Jain v National Testing Agency, the Delhi High Court mentioned that in such petitions the...

Under-Trial/Convicted Persons Do Not Have Absolute Right To Parole in Light of Coronavirus : Bombay High Court

An important judgment was given by the Division Bench of the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court concerning the...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Asks State To File Reply To Examine Whether Privacy Rights of an Individual Can Be Violated by Issuing an Executive...

A Writ Petition was instituted by an individual for violation of his fundamental rights by the State before the...

Bombay High Court Allows Export of Pending Consignment of Onions in Respect of Which Shipping Bills Have Been Generated Before Notification of the Ban

A writ petition challenging the notification dated 14th September 2020 to ban the export of onions was filed by...

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding...

Follow us

On 28th September 2020, Justices Rajesh Bridal and Justice Javed Iqbal Wani heard the case of State of J&K through Principal Secretary, Home Department vs J&K State Human Rights Commission and Ors, via video-conferencing. The Court quashed the Order passed by the J&K State Human Rights Commission as it was passed outside its jurisdiction.

Facts of the Case

J&K State Human Rights Commission (Commission) received a Complaint wherein the Complainant was entitled to arrears of rent qua land measuring 02 Kanals and 04 Marlas. The Petitioner had to pay the rent. The Commission passed an Order against the Petitioner. The Petitioner filed a Writ of Mandamus for the Court to declare the Commission’s Order dated 22nd February 2018 null and void as the same was passed without any jurisdiction. Further, the Petitioner filed a Writ of Prohibition that should restrain the Commission to give effect to the Order passed by them. Further, the Petitioner sought relief under any other Writ, Order or direction which the Court deemed fit.

Arguments of the Petitioner

The Petitioner argued that the Order passed by the Commission was bad in law.  This was because the commission had no jurisdiction to pass the said Order, the same being a Civil dispute. At the most, the Commission could have forwarded the Complaint to the forum having jurisdiction. Further, the Order was passed without any authority of law by the Commission. The Commission could not have inquired into the complaint regarding a matter not falling in its jurisdiction.

Court’s Analysis

The rent was being continuously paid to the Complainant w.e.f. January 2015. The pivotal issue to consider was whether or not the Commission lacked jurisdiction to entertain such a complaint. Section 13 of the Protection of the Human Rights Act, 1993 defines the functions of the Commission. Section 24 of the Act provides for matters not subject to the Commission’s jurisdiction. The current matter was not such which could be entertained by the Commission. Further, Regulation 14 of Jammu and Kashmir State Human Right Commission (Procedure) Regulations 2011 states that the Complaints that are not entertainable by the Commission clearly prohibit civil disputes. Therefore, despite the aforesaid mandate, the Commission not only entertained the Complaint but also rendered a decision. The said action of the Commission runs contrary to the settled proposition of law. Evidently, the Commission entertained the instant case without any jurisdiction.

Court’s Decision

The Court allowed the Writ Petitions filed by the Petitioner and issued the Writ of Mandamus and Prohibition and thereby quashed the Order of the Commission dated 22nd February 2018.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

US Court Orders Iran To Pay $1.4 BN in Damages To Missing Former FBI Agent’s Family

The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered Iran to pay in total $1.45 bn to the Levinson family in punitive...

Onus on Petitioner To Show Unassailable Facts: Delhi High Court

In the case of Rhythm Jain v National Testing Agency, the Delhi High Court mentioned that in such petitions the onus to prove the facts...

Under-Trial/Convicted Persons Do Not Have Absolute Right To Parole in Light of Coronavirus : Bombay High Court

An important judgment was given by the Division Bench of the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court concerning the constitutionality of Rule 19 of...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Asks State To File Reply To Examine Whether Privacy Rights of an Individual Can Be Violated by Issuing an Executive...

A Writ Petition was instituted by an individual for violation of his fundamental rights by the State before the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The...

Bombay High Court Allows Export of Pending Consignment of Onions in Respect of Which Shipping Bills Have Been Generated Before Notification of the Ban

A writ petition challenging the notification dated 14th September 2020 to ban the export of onions was filed by the Exporters Association before the...

Delhi HC: Mens Rea Essential Before Passing an Order U/S 14b of EPF Act

  In the matter of M/s Durable Doors and Windows v APFC, Gurugram, the bench allowed the Petitioner's appeal holding that mens rea is an...

Delhi HC: Language of Statement and Testimony of Complainant Need Not Be Identical

A single-judge bench of J. Vibhu Bakhru of the Delhi High Court upheld the accused's conviction in Kailash @ Balli v State. The bench...

COVID Results Shall Be Conveyed To the Person Within 24 Hours: Delhi High Court

The order has come in a writ petition moved by Rakesh Malhotra. The Petitioner herein seeks to ramp up testing facilities in Delhi.   Facts of...

Delhi High Court Sets Aside the Order of the Trial Court in the Chief Secretary Assault Case

In the case of Mr. Arvind Kejriwal & Anr. V. State NCT of Delhi, Mr.Justice Suresh Kumar Kait has set aside the 24.07.2019 Order...

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an order restraining the manufacturing, marketing,...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -