Why delay in nominations out of POJK DPs & Kashmiri Migrants to Legislative Assembly even when there is no stay from High Court?

Even if sole discretion still LG has to consult ‘some’ one for retrieving the credentials & suitability so for that let it be council of Ministers

DAYA SAGAR
Elections to Legislative Assembly of UT of J&K were held from 18 September to 1 October 2024 in 3 phases to elect 90 members and results were announced on 8 October 2024 and the First session of the First LA of UT of J&K was held from 4th November 2024.It is now over 9 months since the LA was constituted but so far no any nomination has been made by LG of UT of J&K in reference to Sections- 15, 15A and 15 of the J&K Reorganisation Act 34 of 2019 as amended by Act No: 35 of 2023.
It is not out of place to mention here that the Sections 15A and 15B were added in the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 by The Jammu And Kashmir Reorganisation (Amendment) Act, No. 35 of 2023 keeping in view the representations of POJK DPs1947 & Kashmiri Migrants and some recommendations / suggestions made by the Delimitation Commission for the reasons of giving some specific representation to these communities in a way claiming to be suffering from less representation over decades& still living in a state of insecure future. No doubt the representation by nomination that was accorded to POJK DPs 1947/1965/1971 and the advantage that was to accrue has not yet reached the affected families . Why has not that been done is another question ?.
Although no reason for the nomination having not been done has come in the public domain from the official sources but it has been commonly understood that may be that has not been done since some petition is there before the High Court of J&K , particularly pleading that the power to nominated should not be only on the discretion of the LG & LG should do that on the recommendations of the council of ministers and it has been reported that in the reply to petition related issues Home Ministry has stated that as per the Act 34 LG need not necessarily consult the council of Ministers.
But as per the information that is available so far no any order has been issued bySC or J&K High COURT for staying the process of nominations by the LG in reference to the petition before the court. Nor is there any uncertainty about the stability of the present UT Government. As reported it was on 22-10 -2024 J&K high court refused to stay nomination of 5 MLAs by LG. A division bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Rajesh Sekhri refused to grant a stay on the nominations, pending adjudication of the matter and it was also said that in view of the fact that the elected l govt has been formed in J&K , there is no urgency for grant of interim relief prayed for. The HC had then listed the matter for final consideration on Dec 5. The case is still in the court and fixed for hearing on 26-09-2025.
Only sufferers due to delay are the two communities of POJK DPs and Kashmiri migrants. As regards Section -15 for nomination upto 2 woman by LG the same is conditional i.e LG may nominate if in LG’s opinion, women arenot adequately represented in the Legislative Assembly; going by the ECI website three woman have also been elected as MLAs (Shagun Parihar BJP Kishtwar , pursuing a Doctor of Philosophy in Electronics, defeating Sajad Ahmed Kitchloo by over 500 votes; Sakeena Masood ( Kulgam) and Shamim Firdous ( Habbakadal) of the National Conference so in case one out of the two nominated MLAs out of Kashmiri Migrants has also to be a woman then there will be atleast 4 woman MLAs in LA thereby having no inadequacy of woman members ( will with 4 members woman would be still inadequately represented in the LA ?).
So since the petition in HC is more of technical / procedural provisions in Act 34 ( say whether Sections 15, 15A, and 15B of the Reorganisation Act – which empower the LG to nominate additional members beyond the elected Assembly strength – violate the Constitution’s basic structure ? )and there is also no ultimate legal bar on the Government of UT to nominate the POJK DPs representative and Kashmiri Migrants representative to the LA the LG should have no problem in nominating one MLA out of the POJK DPs & atleast one MLA ( if felt LG may go for 2) out of Kashmiri migrants so that atleast some of their voice reaches the legislature. Even if it is assumed that LG is not bound to go for seeking aid and advice from council of Ministers in ‘that’ regard but still for picking up one or two persons out of such large communities LG has to consult ‘some’ one for retrieving the information and so for that let it be council of Ministers. Otherwise also there is no stay from any court.
As stated in the foregoing paras the wisdom and truthfulness of a very senior person like Sh. Manoj Sinha Ji in the chair as LG cannot be so simply questioned and also there being a provision under Section-53 for a council of Ministers to be there to aid & advise the LG in the matters for which Legislative Assembly can make laws/ can legislate so the nomination of members is related to LA , elected government there is with large majority , so let the LG nominate the members from two communities of POJK DPs & Kashmiri Migrants so that they are no more denied their voice any more ( even if the beneficiary communities are not fully satisfied with the numbers slated for nomination under the concerned Act.)
Yes there is also very genuine need for even amending the Section -15B so as to increase the nominated members for POJK DPs 1947/1965/1971 ( to atleat 3 ) looking at the number of their families staying in UT of J&K as on date being much more than the Kashmiri Migrants ( it could be examined to fairness)
(The writer is Sr Journalist and social activist & analyst J&K affairs [email protected] 9419796096)