news details |
|
|
Encroachment of 10 kanals forest land by transport minister | HC treats petition as PIL | | Early Times Report Jammu, Aug 21: In a petition, seeking registration of FIR under Section 5(2) J&K Prevention of Corruption Act against cabinet minister Abdul Ghani Kohli and officers/officials of revenue/forest department for grabbing more than 10 kanals of forest land falling under khasra No 356 min situated at Nowabad (Sunjwan) here, today took a new turn when high court judge B S Walia treated the petition as PIL and referred it to the division bench, directing Registry to treat this petition as PIL. When this petition came up for hearing, the petitioner drew the attention of the court towards his complaint dated June, 16, 2015 which he had filed before Director SVO and SSP VOJ wherein he sought registration of FIR under Section 5(2) J&K Prevention of Corruption Act against Abdul Ghani Kohli and officers/ officials of the Revenue/Forest Department for grabbing more than 10 kanals of Forest Land comprised in Khasra No.356 min situated at Nowabad. The petitioner argued that as per the directions of the Supreme Court in case titled Lalita Kumari V/s State of UP the Vigilance Organization was under a bounden obligation to register FIR against the high profile minister as his complaint discloses the commission of cognizable offences or in the alternative the SVO should have finalized the preliminary enquiry within seven days as prescribed by the Apex Court but neither the FIR was registered nor the preliminary enquiry was finalised solely because of the reason that the accusations were directed against the sitting transport minister of the state. The petitioner submitted that the minister had raised a huge infrastructure on the Forest Land in the shape of a B.Ed college, paramedical institute, branch of J&K Bank alongwith an ATM and the SVO seems to be under pressure to proceed against the sitting minister as the officers of the SVO are accountable to GAD being the servants of the state. During the course of arguments the petitioner pressed for the constant monitoring of the ongoing preliminary inquiry by the high court looking into the gravity of the allegations and the position enjoyed by the encroacher. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
|
BSE
Sensex |
 |
NSE
Nifty |
|
|
|
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|