Find a Lawyer

Decided on 22nd April, 1987.

‑‑‑S. 4‑‑Azad Jammu and Kashmir Political Parties (Audit and Accounts) Rules, 1979, R. 2(2)‑‑Submission of accounts and finances beyond specified period by a Political Party‑‑Show‑cause notice issued to such Political Party for revoking of declaration‑‑Petition for condonation of delay submitted by Political Party‑‑Effect‑‑Chairman, Finance Board of Party taking plea that he had been outside the country for a number of months and that there was no wilful default‑ Default, held, need not be wilful, for intention of defaulting party is hardly relevant, nor any undertaking as to future compliance of requirement would be sufficient reason to condone the delay‑‑Reasons of condonation were to be compelling and substantial‑‑Omission on part of a party official, however, having put in jeopardy, scats of elected members of the party in Assembly, to allow such thing to happen would not be consistent with justice, equity and good conscience and would also be nugatory to the Divine edict of Al‑Ad'1‑Wal‑Ihsan‑‑To avoid making elected representatives of the party as scape goats for acts of omission and commission of another person would be a strong compelling reason to condone the delay‑‑Condonation of delay in submitting accounts and finances of Political Party beyond prescribed party was allowed by Chief Election Commissioner and R.2(2) of Audit and Account Rules, 1979.

In October 1979, the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation League was declared eligible under subsection (4) of section 6 of the AJ&K Political Parties Ordinance (now replaced by Act I of 1987) , to "participate in an election to a seat in the Legislative Assembly or to nominee or put up a candidate at any such election." The party was not formally registered under section 5(3) ibid.

2. Under the AJ&K Political Parties (Audit of Accounts) Rules 1979 framed under section 4 of the Ordinance, the party was obliged to submit accounts and finances in respect of the year 1985‑86 within six weeks of the closure of the financial year. Accordingly, the last date for the submission of accounts was 14‑8‑1986. But the accounts were submitted on 1‑1‑1987, which was long after the terminal date. Therefore, notice was issued to show cause why the declaration made as aforesaid in favour of the party may not be revoked

3. In the meantime the Accountant‑General (A. K) on being directed, examined the accounts "subject to all just objections," and vide report dated 31‑3‑1987 found the same to be in order.

4. For the condonation of delay there is the statement of Sh. Mohayyudin, who during the material period was Secretary‑cum Chairman of the Finance Board of the party, and it is his failure, which has placed the party in this awkward situation. He stated that for a period of four months at a stretch he had been on visit to Saudi Arabia and then to occupied Kashmir and therefore, could not file the statement in time. Sh. Mohayyudin is an ex‑civilian and has his sons in Saudi Arabia and some relatives in occupied Kashmir with whom he had, it appears to settle certain family matters. Because of this lapse, Sh. Mohayyudin has since resigned his office. In course of his statement he was frank enough to concede that by temperament he was unfit for any political office. Further that there being no income or expenditure during the material period, he missed, what in any case would have been filing nil report, but which he now realized, he ought to have done.

5. There is also the affidavit of Mr. Niaz Ahmad Rathore, who initially appeared as advocate, but later was elected as the Central Deputy Secretary‑General of the party and appeared as party office‑holder. All that he says in his affidavit is that there was no wilful ‑default and in any event it would not be repeated. This is neither here nor there. The default need not be wilful for intention of the defaulting party is hardly relevant, nor does any undertaking as to future compliance of the requirement would be a sufficient reason to condone the delay. The reason for condonation must be compelling and substantial or else it will become farcical.

6. There is however one aspect of the matter which cannot be overlooked. Sh. Mohayyudin, who has caused this awkward situation for his party, though himself remains virtually unaffected, has by his omission certainly put in jeopardy the seats of the party Chairman and possibly three other members, in the Legislative Assembly because of the disqualifying provisions in sub‑clause (xiii) of clause (a), sub‑section (2) of section 5 of Ordinance X of 1970. Should the declaration made in favour of J&K Liberation League as aforesaid be revoked, they would not be able to retain their membership in the Assembly. This is notwithstanding that they are not directly responsible for this discomfiture except perhaps they might have been instrumental in the election or selection of Sh. Mohayyudin as the Chairman of the party's Finance Board.

7. On the facts of the case, to allow this to happen would not be consistent with justice equity and good conscience and more than) that would also be nugatory to the Divine edict of A1‑Adal Wal‑Ihsan [16:90]. At any rate, it amounts to making certain persons scapegoats for the omission and omission of another. This is my opinion is strong compelling reason to condone the delay which I do under the third proviso to rule 2(2) of the aforesaid Rules, to avert the calamitous consequences and extend the period for the submission of account to the date of actual submission.

8. Accordingly, I hereby discharge the notice.

A.A./6/E Notice discharged.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.