Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup December 15 - December 21, 2025

Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agriculture Sciences and Technology and another Vs Dr Robinder Nath Koul & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 319

Abdul Majeed Parray & Ors Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 320

Tafazul Fazili Vs Sabzar Ahmad Bandh 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 321

UT of J&K vs Som Raj 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 322

Vikas Dhar Vs Financial Commissioner Revenue & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 323

Akhand Prakash Shahi Vs Union of India 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 324

Mian Abdul Qayoom Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 325

Pyare Lal Bhat & Ors Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din Sheikh Vs State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 327

Radha Krishen Vs UT of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 328

Vikas Bharti Vs Punjab National Bank 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 329

District Kathua Cricket Association & others Vs Board of Control for Cricket in India and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 330

HAKEEM IRFAN AND ORS VS. CHAIRMAN J&K BANK Ltd. AND ORS 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 331

Judgments/Orders

Migrant Status Cannot Dilute Career Progression Once Eligibility Is Met: J&K&L High Court Upholds Retrospective CAS Promotions

Case Title: Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agriculture Sciences and Technology and another Vs Dr Robinder Nath Koul & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 319

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that migrant status cannot be used to dilute career progression once eligibility for promotion is established under statutory rules.

Pension | Employees Of Different Institutions Cannot Claim Parity In Service Merely Because Both Are Funded From Same Source: J&K&L High Court

Case Title: Abdul Majeed Parray & Ors Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 320

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that employees of two different institutions cannot claim parity in service conditions merely because both are funded from the same source.

Justice Sanjay Dhar made this observation while dismissing a batch of writ petitions filed by serving and retired employees of J&K Sainik School who had sought extension of pensionary benefits on par with government employees and employees of other Sainik Schools across the country.

S.143A NI Act Orders Not Interlocutory In Nature, Amenable To Revision Before Session's Court: J&K&L High Court

Case Title: Tafazul Fazili Vs Sabzar Ahmad Bandh

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 321

Reinforcing the procedural safeguards available to both complainants and accused in cheque dishonour cases, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that an order passed by a Magistrate on an application under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is not an interlocutory order but an intermediate order, and therefore amenable to revision before the Sessions Court.

Denying Regularisation To Daily Wager After Extracting Work For Over 34 Years Is Illegal, Inequitable: J&K&L High Court

Case-Title: UT of J&K vs Som Raj

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 322

The Jammu, Kashmir & Ladakh High Court dismissed the Union Territory's challenge to the regularisation of a daily wager, holding that denial of regularisation after extracting work for more than three decades would be illegal, inequitable, and contrary to the welfare obligations of the State.

Revisional Powers Must Be Exercised Within Reasonable Time Even In Fraud Cases; Merits Cannot Justify Gross Delay: J&K&L High Court

Case Title: Vikas Dhar Vs Financial Commissioner Revenue & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 323

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh quashed an order of the Financial Commissioner (Revenue) which had reopened and annulled revenue mutations after more than four decades.

Justice Javed Iqbal Wani, while allowing a writ petition, held that revisional powers whether invoked in cases of fraud or otherwise must be exercised within a reasonable period, and that merits of a case cannot be used as a justification to condone gross delay.

BSF Rules | Court Of Inquiry Is Preliminary Fact Finding Exercise, Not Disciplinary Trial Which Can Cause Prejudice: J&K&L High Court

Case Title: Akhand Prakash Shahi Vs Union of India

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 324

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that such an inquiry is only a fact-finding mechanism intended to assist authorities in deciding the future course of action and does not amount to initiation of departmental proceedings.

J&K&L High Court Rejects Medical Bail Plea Of Former Bar President Mian Abdul Qayoom, Says He Is Provided Specialised Treatment

Case Title: Mian Abdul Qayoom Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 325

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the appeal filed by former Bar Association President Mian Abdul Qayoom seeking bail on medical and humanitarian grounds, holding that the record clearly demonstrates that he has been all along being provided with the advance and specialised treatment whenever necessitated and that no life-threatening medical emergency exists warranting his release at this stage.

'Fought For Justice, Got Justice, Then Lost Justice': J&K&L High Court Restores Seniority Of 1979 Police Recruits After Nearly Four Decades

Case Title: Pyare Lal Bhat & Ors Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 326

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court allowed a long-pending Letters Patent Appeal filed by a batch of 1979 direct recruit Sub Inspectors of the Jammu and Kashmir Police, sharply criticising the manner in which binding judicial verdicts were repeatedly diluted through subsequent litigation and administrative actions.

“Judicial Process Cannot Be Used To Stall Lawful Rehabilitation”: J&K&L High Court Vacates 12-Year Stay On Shop Allotments In Srinagar

Case Title: Ghulam Mohi-ud-Din Sheikh Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 327

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rehabilitation and allotment process of shops in the Sector-6 Shopping Complex, Batamaloo, Srinagar, holding that the litigation was misconceived, devoid of merit, and had resulted in enormous loss to the public exchequer as well as grave prejudice to genuine claimants .

Litigant Who Withholds Material Facts Or Attempts To Mislead Court Forfeits His Right To Be Heard On Merits: J&K&L High Court

Case Title: Radha Krishen Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 328

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court observed that litigant who withholds or suppresses material facts while approaching the Court disentitles himself from being heard on merits and cannot seek or claim any equitable or discretionary relief under Article 226 of the Constitution.

J&K&L High Court Flags Borrowers' Misuse Of Courts To Stall Loan Recovery; Says Conduct Defeats SARFAESI Act's Purpose

Case Title: Vikas Bharti Vs Punjab National Bank

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 329

Deploring the growing tendency of defaulting borrowers to misuse judicial remedies to stall recovery of public money, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh held that such conduct strikes at the very purpose of the SARFAESI Act.

J&K&L High Court Dismisses Plea By District Cricket Bodies Seeking Inclusion In JKCA Electoral College; Says No Enforceable Right

Case Title: District Kathua Cricket Association & others Vs Board of Control for Cricket in India and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 330

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a writ petition filed by District Kathua Cricket Association and other District Cricket Associations, seeking inclusion in the Electoral College of the Jammu and Kashmir Cricket Association (JKCA).

Determinable Lease Cannot Be Specifically Enforced; Interim Injunction Barred U/S 14(d) Specific Relief Act: J&K High Court

Case-Title: HAKEEM IRFAN AND ORS VS. CHAIRMAN J&K BANK Ltd. AND ORS,

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 331

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court held that no specific performance or interim injunction can be granted in respect of a lease agreement which is determinable in nature, reiterating the statutory bar contained under Section 14(d) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.