Jammu and Kashmir High Court: In a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a social activist alleging that the government authorities in Jammu and Kashmir have neglected their duties concerning the protection, renovation, and welfare of ancient Hindu temples in the region, a division bench of Tashi Rabstan, ACJ., and Puneet Gupta, J., dismissed the PIL as withdrawn with the liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation. The Court directed the concerned authorities to address the petitioner’s representation within four weeks, failing which the petitioner may reapproach the Court.
In the instant matter, the petitioner alleged that the Jammu and Kashmir government authorities have neglected their duties concerning the protection, renovation, and welfare of ancient Hindu temples in the region. The petitioner claimed to have made several written representations to the government authorities, seeking action for the protection and renovation of these temples, but received no response. The petitioner filed a PIL and sought court direction for the respondents to take necessary measures to protect, rebuild, and renovate the ancient temples, and to reclaim the temple lands allegedly encroached by the Mafia and property dealers.
The Court noted that the petitioner did not provide specific instances of temple property encroachment by the Mafia in the PIL. The petitioner prayed for the withdrawal of the PIL with the liberty to file a fresh, so that the petitioner could file a detailed representation before the concerned authorities.
The Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the PIL, granting liberty to file a detailed representation with the concerned authorities. The Court directed the authorities to consider and decide on the petitioner’s representation within four weeks from the date of filing. The Court granted the petitioner the liberty to refile the matter if the authorities fail to act within the specified period.
[Gautam Anand v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine J&K 629, Decided on 31-07-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Manik Bhardwaj, Counsel for the Petitioner
Mr. S.S. Nanda, Sr. AAG and Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI, Counsel for the Respondents
