HC reminds J&K admin: Security and govt accommodation can’t be mixed

The 53 cut across party lines and include Democratic Progressive Azad Party (DPAP) chief and former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad, ex-PDP MP and former minister Muzaffar Hussain Beig and former BJP MLA and its J&K president Ravinder Raina.

According to its three-page order dated May 31 and uploaded on the High Court’s website on June 12, the division bench comprising Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh and Justice Puneet Gupta – referring to the report submitted by the administration – observed: “It does not address the issue which has been raised for this Court, as to whether a person who is entitled to security cover would also be entitled to government accommodation, as these are two separate issues.”

A petition had been filed in court by a retired professor, S K Bhalla, through advocate Sheikh Shakeel Ahmed asking why, in spite of repeated court orders clearly delineating the requirements for giving protection and official accommodation, the authorities continued to allow the 53 to stay in government accommodation.

The court referred to a case from last year – filed by former minister Choudhary Lal Singh, a two-time MP and three-time MLA, seeking a stay on his eviction from government accommodation. While Singh had argued that he had Z category protection, the administration had opposed his contention.

“Thus, the inference can be drawn that because of certain threat perception, security cover can be granted to a person, (but) it is not necessary that the person has to be provided government accommodation also, which was also the stand of the administration in the aforesaid case,” the bench observed.

“It was submitted that there is no requirement in law for the government to provide accommodation as well to a person who is being provided security cover. Further, even if accommodation was required to be provided in exceptional circumstances, the accommodation provided to a former chief minister/minister or a retired bureaucrat cannot be the same after his ceasing to occupy the office as he was occupying when he was in office,” the bench observed, quoting the stand taken by the administration itself in Choudhary Lal Singh’s case.

The bench directed the administration to inform it by the next date of hearing about the nature of accommodation provided to these persons and the reasons for doing so. It asked the registry to list the case on July 19.