The Supreme Court Wednesday constituted a five-member committee that will make a comprehensive assessment of the situation in the flood-ravaged areas of Jammu and Kashmir, and report to the court.
An apex court bench of Chief Justice R.M. Lodha, Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman said: "In light of the claims and counter claims made by the parties before us, we are of the considered view that ground situation obtaining in both the regions of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, needs to be ascertained before any further order is passed by this Court."
The court said the committee will comprise a senior registrar of Jammu and Kashmir High Court posted at Srinagar, secretary of the department of revenue, relief and rehabilitation of the state government, a nominee of the central government and the presidents of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court Bar Association in Srinagar and Jammu regions.
The Registrar of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court posted at Srinagar who is nominated to the Committee will be the Convenor of the Committee.
The Committee will submit its interim report within two weeks and a copy of the interim report would also be filed before the Jammu and Kashmir High Court hearing a PIL on a similar subject.
The pendency of the above matter before it, the apex court said, "shall not be an impediment for the Jammu and Kashmir High Court to pass appropriate orders in light of the interim report that may be submitted by the Committee."
The Court constituted a committee as it was contended before it by the petitioner J&K Panthers Party Chief Bhim Singh, senior advocate Colin Gonsalves and petitioner-in-person advocate Vasundhara Pathak Masoodi, that despite tall claims nothing was happening at the ground level for effective implementation of rescue and relief operations.
The petitioners resisted Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi's suggestion that since J&K High Court has started functioning, the entire matter should be sent to it as it was in a better situation to deal with it.
The Attorney General said that judges of the high court were more aware of the situation and if required could get better feedback by sending its registrar and other people.
The matter will come up for hearing on October 10.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
