MUZAFFARABAD: The High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) on Thursday dismissed a constitutional petition filed by local government representatives challenging the legality of the “Dastoorul Amalfor Developmental Programme of Local Government and Rural Development Act, 2025.

The court ruled that the impugned law was constitutional and operated in harmony with existing legislation.

A division bench, comprising Justice Syed Shahid Bahar, the senior puisne judge, and Justice Chaudhary Khalid Rasheed, rejected the plea of elected representatives of local bodies, including district council chairmen, mayors and councillors from across AJK.

The petitioners had sought the striking down of sections 6, 7, 8 and 22 of the 2025 law — or the entire statute — contending that it violated the Interim Constitution and contradicted an earlier High Court judgement of February 19, 2025, which had emphasised the primacy of local councils in development matters.

They argued that the impugned law effectively allowed members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) to influence development schemes, undermining the autonomy of local governments as envisaged under the AJK Local Government Act, 1990, and the Constitution.

However, the court held that the 2025 law and the 1990 Act were “pari materia” — dealing with the same subject — and must be read together through the principle of harmonious construction. It ruled that the newer law did not repeal or override the earlier one but rather complemented it to facilitate the implementation of development programmes.

“The law impugned is not in conflict with any fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution,” observed the judgement authored by Justice Bahar, adding that statutes enjoyed a presumption of constitutionality and courts should avoid interference unless a law was manifestly arbitrary or unreasonable.

The bench emphasised that both laws could operate side by side to achieve a common objective, noting that the Local Government Act, 1990 provided the foundational framework, while the 2025 Act offered an additional mechanism for execution of development schemes.

It held that any apparent overlap or inconsistency must be resolved through harmonious interpretation rather than invalidation, reiterating that implied repeal of laws was disfavoured in jurisprudence.

Rejecting the petitioners’ contention that the new law was enacted to bypass the earlier court ruling, the judges observed that the legislative assembly was competent to enact laws in public interest and that no sufficient grounds had been made out to strike down the statute.

The court also referred to past judicial precedents, noting that the policy underlying the impugned law had long existed and had been recognised by superior courts, further strengthening the presumption of its constitutionality.

Concluding that no case for judicial intervention had been established, the bench dismissed the petition along with all pending applications.

Published in Dawn, April 25th, 2026