HC flags Govt’s remiss over responses, directs time-bound mechanism

Expressing its dismay over the remiss to file responses, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has directed the government to put in place a mechanism that would facilitate effective representation of the Government before the Courts.

A bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal urged the government to devise an effective and time-bound mechanism to ensure prompt transmission of records to the concerned counsel, timely preparation and filing of objections, effective monitoring of pending cases and fixation of responsibility upon officers, who are remiss in discharging their duties.

“Such a mechanism would not only facilitate effective representation of the Government before the Courts, but also obviate the necessity of passing coercive orders against the Government and safeguard the public interest,” the court said.

The court said this while hearing a case titled Ali Muhammad Wani vs Union Territory of J&K and Ors that was listed before it on April 22.

The record revealed that the case was filed way back on June 14, 2023 and, thereafter, several opportunities were granted to the authorities for filing the response, the court observed. Even the last opportunity was granted to the respondents(authorities) vide order dated October 31, 2025; however, no response was filed.

Accordingly, the Court vide order dated November 28, 2025, closed the right of the respondents (authorities) to file the reply. The matter was again listed on March 9, 2026, on which date, a Deputy Advocate General appeared and was directed to produce the record on April 22, the next date fixed in the matter, the court said.

“Today, when the case was taken up, neither the record has been produced, nor is there any representation on behalf of the respondents. However, on the asking of the Court Ilyas Nazir Laway, Government Advocate, has caused appearance,” the court observed.

The court noted that it was clear from its orders passed from time to time that the authorities had not bothered to comply with these orders which ultimately led to closure of their right to file the reply.

The failure of the respondents(authorities) even to produce the record depicted their scant respect to the orders of the court and their taking of these orders very casually, the court said.

Apart from this case, there were several cases listed wherein, despite availing repeated opportunities and last opportunity as well, the authorities have not bothered to file a reply, it said.

The court noted that in a large number of cases involving the Government, replies were not being filed within the stipulated time, despite repeated opportunities being granted. “Such a practice not only contributes to the mounting backlog of cases, but also seriously impedes the efficient administration of justice”.

In its order, the court also noted that it was brought to its notice that the Law Officers had been consistently issuing reminders and telephonic requests to the concerned officers for filing of reply in time. Yet the same are not being given to the counsel engaged well in time, the court said. In this way, the counsel representing a particular department is not a position to file the response in time.

“In case that be the position, then the Secretary of Law shall fix the responsibility on such officers, who are remiss in drafting a reply well in time, as a result of which, adverse orders are passed against the Government, and the interests of the Government are hampered in such like cases”.

While the court noted that the timely compliance of the orders and directions of the Court is not a matter of discretion, but a constitutional imperative, it said: “Any delay or indifference in adherence thereto strikes at the very root of the rule of law and has the tendency to erode public confidence in the administration of justice”.

Despite the number of directions issued by the Court regarding non-filing of the response as well as non-appearance of the counsel in the matters concerning the Government, no effective and concrete mechanism is being put in place, the court noted.

Meanwhile, the Court directed J&K’s Secretary Law to appear in person on April 27, to apprise it of the “steps being taken to ensure that cases concerning the Government are properly defended and the interests of the unattended”.

The Court said the present order- copy of which the Registry was directed to send to the Secretary law – was being passed only to ensure that an effective mechanism was put in place, so that the replies were filed well within time to obviate the necessity of passing coercive orders against the Government and safeguard the public interest.