<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Union government as to why it did not place the orders on communication restrictions passed just before the decision on August 5 to withdraw the special status in Jammu and Kashmir.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices N V Ramana, R Subhash Reddy and B R Gavai told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to furnish the copy of such orders or provide reasons for not making it public.</p>.<p>Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for Kashmir Times executive editor Anuradha Bhasin, pointed out that despite the apex court's specific directions, the Centre had failed to put on record those orders imposing restrictions on mobile and internet, affecting the work of the media.</p>.<p>Mehta said the petitioner was trying to widen the scope of the writ petition. The prayer was against the restrictions, the situation on the ground was improving and those curbs were also gradually being removed, he said.</p>.<p>“Nobody can sit in appeals on executive orders passed in national security, especially not the petitioners,” he said.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for some of the parties, said it can definitely be pointed out that those orders were not placed before the court.</p>.<p>The bench, however, asked the Solicitor General to place those orders or disclose reasons for not doing so and put the matter for hearing on October 25.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Union government as to why it did not place the orders on communication restrictions passed just before the decision on August 5 to withdraw the special status in Jammu and Kashmir.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices N V Ramana, R Subhash Reddy and B R Gavai told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to furnish the copy of such orders or provide reasons for not making it public.</p>.<p>Advocate Vrinda Grover, appearing for Kashmir Times executive editor Anuradha Bhasin, pointed out that despite the apex court's specific directions, the Centre had failed to put on record those orders imposing restrictions on mobile and internet, affecting the work of the media.</p>.<p>Mehta said the petitioner was trying to widen the scope of the writ petition. The prayer was against the restrictions, the situation on the ground was improving and those curbs were also gradually being removed, he said.</p>.<p>“Nobody can sit in appeals on executive orders passed in national security, especially not the petitioners,” he said.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for some of the parties, said it can definitely be pointed out that those orders were not placed before the court.</p>.<p>The bench, however, asked the Solicitor General to place those orders or disclose reasons for not doing so and put the matter for hearing on October 25.</p>
