AWAMI BEHBOODI COMMITTEE Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN order No.34 -HME of 1988 dated 18 -1 -1988 passed by the respondent for upgradation of subsidiary Health Centre at D.K. Pora, Shopian, sought to be quashed has been made basis for this petition, seeking further relief of mandamus to respondents for upgradation of Subsidiary Health Centre at village Harman Shopian, for which according to the petitioner, provision has been made in the budget by the respondent, giving the petitioner, a village body for welfare of the area, a right to knock the door of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir.

(2.) THE facts, putforth by the petitioner, are: that several representations having been made to the Respondent authorities including his Excellency the Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, for upgradation of Subsidiary Health Centre at Harman, respondent No.4 has kept a provision in the District Budget for upgradation of Subsidiary Health Centre to Primary. Health Centre but due to political interference, village Harman, site of the Subsidiary Health Centre falling in Kulgam Assembly constituency where an opposition candidate has been returned, the decision of the Cabinet (District Board) Committee got influenced and found favour with the upgradation of Subsidiary Health Centre at D.K. Pora to Primly Health Centre under order impugned as this village fell an the Shopian Assembly constituency, where ruling party candidate in the Assembly election has been returned, resulting deprivation of the petitioners of up -gradation of their subsidiary Health Centre at Harman.

(3.) RESPONDENTS on being noticed vide their written objections on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 represented by Mr. M.M. Din, AAG and Respondent No.5 represented by Mr.Baig, objected commonly the maintainability of the petition for the reason, the petitioner being a non -recognised body further no provision in the budget having been made by the respondent -Slate in respect of Upgradation of Subsidiary Health Centre at Harman except the recommendation by respondent No.4 Chief Medical Officer, pulwama to the higher authorities to tie effect for upgradation of Subsidiary Health Centre at Harman which recommendation has no binding force on the Govt. nor the recommendation relied by the petitioner confers any right on them to maintain this writ pension, particularly when a location of funds at District Level in presence of single lint Administration is being made by the Govt. on the Assembly constituency basis. The upgradation of subsidiary Health Centre at D.K. Pora to P.H.C. is an outcome of cabinet decision on verification of record consideration of feasibility, and recommendation of District Development Commissioned Pulwama, on the subject the petitionersâ„¢ claim cannot be entertained by the Court as it is the Executive authority alone -to judge and meet the public demand.