Union Of India Vs Altaf Ahmad Mir 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 169

State of J&K Vs Gulji Bhai & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 170

State of J&K Vs Rajinder Kumar 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 171

M/s Delton Infra Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of J&K and another 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 172

Sh. Krishan Singh Jasrotia (deceased) represented through LRs Bimla Devi and others Vs Union of India and others 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 173

State of J&K Vs Tariq Hussain 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 174

Raman Masih Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 175

Ashfaq Ahmed Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 176

Chand Devi Vs Sonam Choudhary 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 177

United India Insurance Vs Sajjad Hussain 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 178

National Insurance Company Ltd. thr. Its Divisional Manager and Anr Vs M/S Rash Builders Civil Contractors and Suppliers thr. its Manager 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 179

Bilal Ahmad Ganaie Vs Sweety Rashid & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 180

Abid Hussain Ganie Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 181

Abid Ahmad Ganai Vs UT of J&k & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 182

Yatin Yadav Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 183

Mohd. Abdullah Vs Manager, Trumboo Cement Industry Limited and Another 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 184

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Mst. Aisha Bano & Ors. 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 185

Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise Vs Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt. Ltd 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 186

Mohammad Yousuf Allie Vs High Court of JK Th. its Registrar General & Anr 2023 LiveLaw(JKL) 187

Ishfaq Tantray Vs Khalid Jahangir, Chairman Service Selection Board 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 188

Hazik Wangnoo Vs Ut of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 189

The Commissioner of Income Tax v/s The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 190

Sanjay Sharma Vs UT ofJ&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 191

Subash Chander Vs State of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 192

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S The J&K Bank Ltd. 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 193

Khalid Amin Kohli Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 194

Raj Kumar Gupta Vs Bank of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw(JKL) 195

Mohhamd Rafiq Khan Vs PNB 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 196

Abdul Rashid Wani Vs UT of J&K 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 197

Raj Ali and Others Vs Union Of India & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 198

Judgments/Orders:

CCS Rules Cannot Be Applied To CRPF Constables Unless CRPF Rules Are Silent On A Specific Matter: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Union Of India Vs Altaf Ahmad Mir.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 169

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court while reiterating that the service conditions of a CRPF Constable (probationer) are governed by the CRPF Rules 1955 has emphasised that the Central Civil Services (CCS) Rules can only be applied if the CRPF Rules do not explicitly address a specific issue.

If a case is already covered by the CRPF Rules, there is no need to refer to the General Rules like the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, it explained.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Acquittal Of BSF Personnel In Army Patrol Firing Case That Occurred During Kargil War

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Gulji Bhai & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 170

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court upheld the acquittal of Border Security Force (BSF) personnel accused in the highly controversial Army patrol firing case that took place on the fateful night of July 16/17, 1999 during the Kargil War.

"Unfortunately, respondents have been roped in, merely on the basis of suspicion, otherwise, there is absolutely no evidence to establish that respondents had deliberately fired upon the Army patrol party", a bench of Justices Sanjay Dhar and Rajesh Sekhri observed.

No Compulsory Retirement Merely On Committee Recommendation, Competent Authority Must Be Satisfied Of 'Bonafide' Public Interest: J&K High Court

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Rajinder Kumar

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 171

Shedding light on the criteria for compulsory retirement of government employees under the J&K Civil Services Regulations, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that the decision to retire an employee prematurely cannot be solely based on recommendations from a committee. Instead, the competent authority must independently form a bona fide opinion that the retirement is in the interest of the institution, it ruled.

Employer Making EPF Contribution Under Central Act Can't Be Compelled To Contribute For Same Employee Under State Act: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: M/s Delton Infra Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of J&K and another

Citation:2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 172

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled that employers cannot be forced to contribute to the Employees' Provident Fund (EPF) under both the Central Employees Provident Fund Act and the Jammu and Kashmir EPF Act for the same employee. Making duplicate contributions would amount to doubling the liability on the part of the employer, the court emphasised.

25 Yrs On, Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Departmental Promotion Committee To Consider Promotion Of Cop Posthumously

Case Title: Sh. Krishan Singh Jasrotia (deceased) represented through LRs Bimla Devi and others Vs Union of India and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 173

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ordered the Home Department to constitute a fresh Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) to consider the posthumous promotion of a late police officer to the rank of Assistant Commandant. The court's decision came after a prolonged legal battle spanning 25 years, in which the petitioner had sought rightful promotion and recognition for his service.

Sarcastic Remarks, Mere Harassment By Husband Due To Marital Discord Not 'Abetment Of Suicide': Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: State of J&K Vs Tariq Hussain.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 174

Mere harassment of a wife by her husband or in-laws due to matrimonial discord or sarcastic remarks per se does not attract the offence of abetment of suicide, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held.

While upholding the acquittal of a man from charges under Section 306 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC) after his wife set herself ablaze and died, a single bench of Justice Rajesh Sekhri observed,

"There may be various instances of matrimonial discord between husband and wife and at times wife being constantly taunted and subjected to sarcastic remarks in the house of her in-laws may be driven to commit suicide. However, such instances are normal wear and tear of a matrimonial life. In my opinion mere harassment of a wife by her husband or in-laws due to matrimonial discord or sarcastic remarks perse does not attract Section 306 of RPC (abetment of suicide)."

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Sets Aside Rape Conviction After 17 Yrs, Says Non-Compliance With Section 313 CrPC Prejudiced Accused

Case Title: Raman Masih Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 175

While setting aside a rape conviction handed down 17 years ago, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted a crucial failure on the part of the Trial Court to adhere to the mandatory procedure outlined in Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

It emphasized that convicting the appellant-accused solely based on incriminating evidence, without providing an opportunity to the appellant to address and explain that evidence, was an invalid approach taken by the trial court.

PSA | Jammu & Kashmir High Court Pulls Up District Magistrate For Wrongly Mentioning Detenu's Name, Issuing Corrigendum As "Cover Up"

Case Title: Ashfaq Ahmed Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 176

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court slammed a District Magistrate for wrongly mentioning the name of detenu in the operative part of the preventive detention order issued under the J&K Public Safety Act and issuing a "so-called" corrigendum after detention

J&K Hindu Succession Act | Will Can Be Executed In Favour Of Unrelated Person: High Court

Case Title: Chand Devi Vs Sonam Choudhary

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 177

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court made it clear that a Will under Section 27 of the Jammu and Kashmir Hindu Succession Act can be executed in favour of a person who is not even related to the executant.

A single bench of Justice Vinod Chaterjee Koul said Will is statutorily recognized mode of "alteration of natural line of succession" delineated by Hindu Succession Act without any prohibition, curbs, rider etc.

Insurer Bound By Contract Entered Into By Authorized Agent On Its Behalf, Premium Paid By Insured To Agent Binds Company: J&K High Court

Case Title: United India Insurance Vs Sajjad Hussain

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 178

Upholding the liability of an insurance company for compensation despite a dishonoured premium cheque, the Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court has recently ruled that that the insurance company cannot evade its responsibility if an authorized agent collects the premium in cash but issues a personal cheque that later bounces.

“It would be deemed as if the amount of the premium had been collected by the insurance company, even though the agent may have instead of depositing the premium with the company, issued a cheque from his own account which ultimately got dishonored”, Justice Sanjay Dhar observed.

Fitness Certificate Implicit In Temporary Registration Certificate For New Vehicles: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Company Ltd. thr. Its Divisional Manager and Anr Vs M/S Rash Builders Civil Contractors and Suppliers thr. its Manager

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 179

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court has held that a fitness certificate is implicitly included in the temporary registration certificate issued to a brand-new vehicle and hence repudiating an insurance claim solely based on the absence of a fitness certificate is not sustainable in law.

“…The object behind the requirement of a fitness certificate under Section 56 of the Act and sheer common sense, we cannot contemplate the sale of any brand-new vehicle, which is not otherwise fit. The sale of a brand-new vehicle itself implies that it is fit. It is only after the due course of time, and use of the vehicle, the requirement of fitness becomes relevant. Therefore, the issuance of temporary registration for a brand-new vehicle implies that for the said period of registration, the vehicle is fit”, Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh & Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi observed.

S.397(3) CrPC | Filing Revision Petition Before Sessions Court Doesn't Bar High Court's Inherent Jurisdiction: Jammu & Kashmir HC

Case Title: Bilal Ahmad Ganaie Vs Sweety Rashid & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 180

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court while emphasising the wide amplitude of the High Court's inherent powers clarified that filing a revision petition before a Sessions Court does not preclude the petitioner from invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C).

No FIR Against Detenu, Record Appears To Be Manipulated: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order

Case Title: Abid Hussain Ganie Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 181

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court quashed a preventive detention order passed against a person in absence of any FIR against him. A single bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar remarked,

"Surprisingly, when no FIR is shown to have been registered against the petitioner, then how come 27 leaves of FIR etc. have been provided to him. This exhibits total non-application of mind and overzealousness on the part of the detaining authority, which casts serious doubt about the authenticity of the receipt."

[J&K Civil Service Rules] Contractual Employee Not Entitled To Full-Fledged Regular Enquiry Before Termination: High Court

Case Title: Abid Ahmad Ganai Vs UT of J&k & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 182

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court on ruled that a contractual employee is not entitled to a full-fledged regular enquiry before termination, even if the termination is stigmatic in nature.

[PSI Recruitment Scam] Completion Of Investigation Qua Accused, Not Investigation Of Entire Case Material To Determine Default Bail: J&K High Court

Case Title: Yati Yadav Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 183

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court rejected the applications for default bail moved by several accused in the J&K Police Sub-inspector Recruitment Scam, including alleged mastermind Yatin Yadav.

It observed,

"Charge sheet can be said to be complete when it enables the court whether to take or not take cognizance of the offences and if certain facets call for further investigation, it would not render such report other than a final report...completion of investigation relating to offence against the accused and not investigation of case or filing of charge sheet under section 173 Cr.P.C. which would be material for the purpose of determining whether accused is entitled to the grant of statutory bail or not."

Employees’ Compensation Act | Insurer Not Automatically Liable To Indemnify Employer For Interest On Delayed Payment Of Compensation: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohd. Abdullah Vs Manager, Trumboo Cement Industry Limited and Another

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 184

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court ruled that an insurance company cannot be, as a matter of rule, asked to indemnify an employer for the interest and penalty payable for delayed payment of compensation under the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923.

A single bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar held,

"It is true that under the policy of insurance covering the injuries and death of the workmen working under the employer, the insurer undertakes to indemnify the employer in respect of any compensation payable to such injured/deceased workmen during the course of his employment, but such contract to indemnify the employer in respect of payment of compensation cannot ipso facto extend to the payment of interest and penalty that becomes due from the employer only in case he commits default in payment of compensation due within a period of one month."

[Motor Accident Death] No Interest Can Be Awarded On Compensation For 'Future Prospects': Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: National Insurance Company Limited Vs Mst. Aisha Bano & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 185

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled that there is no need to award interest on compensation ordered under the head of 'future prospects' in a motor accident death case.

Justice M.A Chowdhary explained that 'future prospects' are linked to potential income to be received in the future and thus interest cannot be granted on a future income.

“The reason for awarding interest on the compensation amount, minus the future prospects, is due to the fact that, though the loss of dependency starts from the date of the accident, the compensation amount is computed on the date of the award of the Tribunal, interest is awarded to compensate the loss of money value on account of lapse of time, such as the time taken for the legal proceedings and for the denial of right to utilize the money when due’, the bench observed.

No Recovery Proceedings U/S 11A Central Excise Act Unless Sanctioned Refunds Reversed In Appeal: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise Vs Krishi Rasayan Exports Pvt. Ltd

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 186

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that Section 11A of the Central Excise Act 1944 which deals with recovery proceedings is not applicable when the excise duty refund has been sanctioned by the competent authority through proper assessment and after following due process.

“Unless the orders of sanctioning refund passed by the Adjudicating Authority are reversed in appeal or revision under the Act, Section 11 cannot be invoked by terming such sanctioned refund of excise duty as ‘erroneous refund’ by holding collateral proceedings under section 11A of the Act”, Justice Sanjeev Kumar & Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Upholds Termination Of Judicial Officer, Says Fraudulent Appointments Not Entitled To Safeguards Under Article 311

Case Title: Mohammad Yousuf Allie Vs High Court of JK Th. its Registrar General & Anr.

Citation : 2023 LiveLaw(JKL) 187

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court upheld the termination of a judicial officer on the ground that he fraudulently obtained the benefit of “Resident of Backward Area” certificate during the selection process.

“…The entry into service of the petitioner itself was by fraudulent means and, therefore, depriving him of an opportunity of departmental enquiry is not in violation of Article 311”, Justice Atul Sreedharan & Justice Mohan Lal observed.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Declines Contempt Action Against SSB Chairman Citing UT Admin's Decision Withdrawing Posts After Reorganisation

Case Title: Ishfaq Tantray Vs Khalid Jahangir, Chairman Service Selection Board.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 188

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court refused to initiate contempt action against the Chairman of J&K Service Selection Board for non-compliance of its 2013 direction for undertaking fresh selection process to the posts of Assistant Information Officer Grade-II for which the advertisement was issued in 2006.

A bench of Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh & Justice Javed Iqbal Wani noted that the direction could not be complied with in view of UT Administration's policy decision to withdraw all posts referred to the JKPSC/JKSSB prior to October 31, 2019 for which the selections were not finalized or posts in which there were pending litigations. Thus it observed that the SSB was not in a position to make any appointments pursuant to the selection process.

Juvenile Justice Board Is 'Criminal Court' Justifying Withholding Of Passport U/S 6(2)(f): Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Hazik Wangnoo Vs Ut of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 189

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court clarified that a Juvenile Justice Board possesses all the trappings of a Criminal Court, justifying the non-issuance of passport or travel documents under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act to a person facing proceedings before the JJB.

Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

"Juvenile Justice Board has all the trappings of a Criminal Court, the proceedings against the petitioner which are pending before the said Board in respect of offences under Sections 447, 354, 323, 382, 201 of IPC would certainly attract the provisions under Section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act."

J&K Roads Development Agency Is Exempted From TDS Deduction On TD Account Interest: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: The Commissioner of Income Tax v/s The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 190

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that the J&K State Rural Roads Development Agency (JKSRRDA) is exempt from TDS deduction on interest income accrued on Term Deposit Accounts.

The bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Puneet Gupta has observed that JKSRRDA is a society registered under the J&K Societies Registration Act, 1998, and is a body wholly financed by the Central Government for implementation of PMGSY and, therefore, exempt from TDS in terms of Notification No. 3489 dated October 22, 1970, issued by the Central Government under Section 194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Income Tax Act.

Jammu & Kashmir High Court Sets Aside "Unceremonious Disengagement" Of Special Police Officer For Non-Compliance Of Natural Justice Principles

Case Title: Sanjay Sharma Vs UT ofJ&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 191

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed the dismissal of a Special Police Officer (SPO) and reinstated him to his position, reiterating that adherence to the principles of natural justice is nothing but common sense justice.

“…You cannot condemn a person to suffer an adverse consequence in the context of his public position/employment without affording him/her an opportunity of knowing the basis upon which a purported adverse action is aimed to be taken against him/her thereby serve him/her with an opportunity to explain his/her position vis-à-vis the adverse civil consequence conceived to emerge”, Justice Rahul Bharti observed.

Traditional Families Hesitant To Report Crimes Involving Dignity Of Young Woman: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Subash Chander Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 192

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court highlighted the hesitancy of traditional families to report cases concerning the dignity of young women to the police, fearing it might jeopardize their own honour. The court emphasised that a slight delay in lodging an FIR in such cases should not be deemed fatal for the prosecution case.

“…Wherein dignity of a woman that too of a younger age is involved, the traditional families are hesitant to report such matters to the police putting their honour and dignity also at stake, therefore the delay of a single day in lodging of FIR, in the considered opinion of this court, by no stretch of imagination, can be said to be inordinate delay, so as to be fatal for the prosecution case”, Justice M A Chowdhary observed.

Jammu Development Authority Is Creation Of Statute, Exempt From TDS Deduction On Interest U/S 194A(1) Income Tax Act: High Court

Case Title: Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs M/S The J&K Bank Ltd.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 193

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court ruled that the Jammu Development Authority (JDA) is to be considered a corporation established under the State Act and thus is exempt from the operation of Section 194A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

“...The JDA is not incorporated like the company which is incorporated under the Companies Act or the Cooperative Society which is registered under the Cooperative Societies Act. The JDA is a statutory body….There can hardly be any dispute that JDA is a corporation constituted under the State Act i.e the Development Act 1970. S.O 3489 of 1970 clearly notifies a corporation established by a Central, State or Provincial Act exempt from the operation of sub-section (1) of Section 194A of the Act’, Justices Sanjeev Kumar & Javed Iqbal Wani observed.

S.482 CrPC Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Proceedings Initiated U/S 12 J&K Domestic Violence Act: High Court

Case Title: Khalid Amin Kohli Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 194

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) cannot be used to challenge the proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the Jammu and Kashmir Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2010 or the orders passed thereunder.

S.34 SARFAESI Act Bars Grant Of Injunction By Civil Court For Actions Taken Under The Act: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Raj Kumar Gupta Vs Bank of india & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw(JKL) 195

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that no injunction shall be granted by any court in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).

“Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act creates a bar and provides that no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act or under the recovery of debts due to the bank and Financial Institution Act, 1993”, a bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed.

Order XXII CPC For Bringing On Record Legal Heirs Of Deceased Party Apply To Proceedings For Restoration Of Suit: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohhamd Rafiq Khan Vs PNB &

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 196

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court clarified that the applicability of Order XXII of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) which govern the procedure for bringing on record the legal representatives of the deceased plaintiffs/ defendants as also the procedure for setting aside of the abatement, is not limited to suits alone.

Single bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that the provisions of Order XXII are equally applicable in suits, appeals, and proceedings relating to the restoration of a suit.

Dismissing Plea On Ground Of Laches At Post-Admission Stage Not An Apparent 'Error Of Law' Warranting Review: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Case Title: Abdul Rashid Wani Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 197

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court asserted that dismissing a plea on the ground of laches at a post-admission stage does not tantamount to an apparent error of law, and hence, the court cannot invoke its power of review.

“The question of delay and laches could not have been entertained and considered by the court after the admission of the writ petition cannot by any stretch of imagination said to be ground available to the petitioner to seek review of the judgment/order under review either on the ground that the judgments supporting the said contention of the petitioner came to be discovered after the passing of the judgment under review or on the ground that entertaining and accepting the ground of delay and laches at post-admission stage is an apparent error of law”, Chief Justice N Kotiswar Singh & Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed.

Admin Order To Take Over Madrasas Run By A Particular Trust Cannot Be Universally Applied To Other Madarsas Being Run Legitimately: J&K High Court

Case Title: Raj Ali and Others Vs Union Of India & Ors

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 198

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court quashed the controversial administrative order issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kishtwar, whereby it had directed the takeover of Madrasas run by several petitioners.

A bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar observed,

“…The order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Jammu dated 14.06.2023 is very specific and pertains only to the Madarsas being run by Maulana Ali Miyan Educational Trust, Bathindi. The Divisional Commissioner, Jammu has not passed any order in respect of other Madarsas which are being run by other Educational Charitable Trusts established for the purpose. The Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kishtwar was, thus, not correct to apply the order of the Divisional Commissioner to close down or take over the Madarsas run by the petitioners’ Trusts, unless he had in possession a substantial proof that the Madarsas of the petitioners are connected or related to the Maulana Ali Miyan Educational Trust, Bathindi”.