Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Oct 1: High Court has dismissed petition filed by Mohammad Anwar Chowdhary seeking quashment of Statutory Order No.127 dated 20.04.2020 by virtue of which the amendments have been made in the relevant rules of Jammu and Kashmir Reservation Rules 2005 wherein 4% reservation has been provided to “Pahari Speaking People” in respect of each service, class category, grade in the services and post under the State/Union Territory as per amended Rules 2005.
After hearing Advocate SM Choudhary for the petitioner whereas ASGI Vishal Sharma for the Union of India and Government Suraj Singh for the UT, Justice Sanjay Dhar observed, “it is clear that under ordinary circumstances, a third person, having no concern with the case, cannot claim to have any locus standi to raise any grievance whatsoever”.
“However, if the actual persons aggrieved, because of ignorance, illiteracy etc., are unable to approach the court and a person, who has no personal agenda, approaches the court, then the court may examine the issue. Even in cases filed in public interest, the court can exercise the writ jurisdiction at the instance of a third party only when it is shown that legal injury is threatened and the affected class of persons is unable to approach the court on account of their poverty etc”, Justice Dhar said.
He observed, “the petitioners have not, at all, disclosed as to how they are aggrieved of the impugned Statutory Order and they have not stated as to which of their legal rights have been affected by the impugned action of the respondents”, adding the petitioners, therefore, do not qualify as “aggrieved persons” who can maintain a writ of certiorari or a writ of mandamus against the respondents. They have not even disclosed their credentials. It is not discernible as to which class of persons the petitioners are representing. They have not even averred in the petition that they are filing the petition in public interest.
“Therefore, the instant petition cannot even be treated as a public interest petition. The judgments relied upon by counsel for the petitioners, either relate to public interest petitions or the same relate to cases where a writ of quo warranto has been sought. In such matters, as already noticed, locus standi of the petition becomes immaterial, as such, the ratio laid down in these cases is of no help to the case of the petitioners”, High Court said while dismissing the writ petition.
Follow our WhatsApp channel