The Supreme Court ordered the government on Friday to publish the final decisions of the committee which reviews internet suspension orders in the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.
A three-judge Bench headed by Justice BR Gavai however agreed with the government that the internal deliberations of the review process need not be made public.
The court did not delve on whether the reasons or findings of the review committee need to be published. The Bench said it was for an individual petitioner to raise the plea in the appropriate forum or court that non-existence of reasons, if any, in a final review order affected their right to challenge.
“We are not going into that aspect,” Justice Gavai remarked.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government, said the review process was an “internal check” into the proportionality of the temporary suspension orders.
The hearing was based on a miscellaneous application filed by the Foundation for Media Professionals seeking compliance with a Supreme Court judgment in the Anuradha Bhasin case in January 2020.
The judgment had found indefinite suspension of internet and telecom services “impermissible”. The court had laid down interim procedural safeguards to ensure that authorities did not misuse its powers under the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Service) Rules, 2017 in the Valley.
It had said the review committee constituted under Rule 2(5) of the Suspension Rules must conduct a periodic review within seven working days of the previous review.
Under Rule 2(5), the review committee would consist of the Chief Secretary; Secretary Law or Legal Remembrancer InCharge, Legal Affairs; and Secretary to the State government (other than the Home Secretary).
“The review committee must therefore not only look into the question of whether the restrictions are still in compliance with the requirements of Section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act, but must also look into the question of whether the orders are still proportionate, keeping in mind the constitutional consequences,” the judgment had said.
The judgment had directed the authorities to publish “all orders in force and any future orders under Section 144, Cr.P.C and for suspension of telecom services, including internet, to enable the affected persons to challenge it before the High Court or appropriate forum”.
On Friday, Mr. Mehta said the government was under the impression that only the suspension orders were required to be published in view of the 2020 judgment, and not the review orders.
Agreeing with the court that the review of the suspension order was not meant as an “empty formality”, the top law officer said the government was under the impression that the “order of internet suspension is to be uploaded and the internal check is not to be made public”.
Appearing for the applicant, advocate Shadan Farasat submitted that other States like Arunachal, Assam, Bihar, Maharashtra, Meghalaya and Punjab publish their review orders.
“All the other States, including the border States, are publishing… I am surprised why Jammu and Kashmir is resisting it,” Mr. Farasat submitted.
Mr. Mehta said the government had no objections publishing the review orders if the court wanted it to do so. He wondered why the applicant was intent on Jammu and Kashmir.
“All the other States are publishing, and we are only required to go into the legal question,” Justice Gavai responded.
“If Your Lordships want, we will publish,” Mr. Mehta acquiesced.
