Srinagar: In a two decade old case, the High Court of J&K and Ladakh has directed the government to reconsider the compensation claim of a widow of Reyaz Ahmad Ahanger, who was allegedly killed in Army custody in 2000.
A court of Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul directed the authorities to resolve the matter within eight weeks.
The court was hearing a plea filed by a widow, Mymoona Begum, seeking implementation of a 2001 recommendation by the State Human Rights Commission (SHRC), which proposed a compensation of Rs. 5 lakh and consideration for appointment under SRO 43.
As per the plea, Maymoona’s husband was a Mechanic by profession, who was picked up by Army on October 30, 2000 and killed in custody.
An FIR was lodged by his brother on November 01, 2000. She through her father approached the Commission with a petition, which was decided on April 27, 2001. However, despite the passage of more than 23 years, the respondents have not implemented the recommendations of the Commission.
The court noted that Rs. 1 lakh ex gratia had been paid in 2004, but the petitioner’s request for additional relief was earlier denied by the General Administration Department in 2009 stating that it did not qualify under SRO 43 of 1994 or the relaxation policy.
Justice Koul underscored that the order of the Commission, on which petitioner relies, is recommendatory in nature as it recommends to the Government to consider the case of petitioner for ex gratia relief and compassionate appointment under SRO 43 of 1994.
The court further noted that the SHRC’s recommendations are advisory in nature and do not carry binding authority.
“The Commission is neither a judicial authority nor a quasi-judicial authority to adjudicate upon the disputed facts. Therefore, the recommendations made by the Commission cannot be termed as a verdict on resolving the disputed facts and the same are not binding on the parties before the Commission, “ it recorded.
However, it ordered the Deputy Commissioner of Baramulla to expedite the resolution process by presenting the case to the District Level Coordination-cum-Screening Committee for a decision based on existing rules.
The court dismissed additional claims for Rs. 10 lakh compensation as unsupported by existing provisions and directed that the matter be assessed on its merits