Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Roundup March 31 - April 6, 2025

M/s Devyani International Limited vs Airport Authority of India and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 127

Rattan Chand & Ors vs UT OF J&K & ORS 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 128

Mohd Iqbal Koka Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 129

Mohammad Imran Ganai And Anr. Vs Government Through Police Station Dangiwacha 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 130

Chief Engineer PW(R&B) Department and another vs M/s Abdul Salam Mir 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 131

Dr. Rajeev Gupta vs U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 132

Dogra Sangathan Vs State of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 133

Javaid Ahmad Bhat Vs UT Of J&K 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 134

UT Of J&K Vs Ghulam Nabi Itoo & Ors 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 135

UT of J&K through its Commissioner vs Kashmiri Lal 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 136

Adil Hussain Mir vs UT of JK and others 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 137

Judgments/Orders:

No Absolute Right To Bypass Mandatory Pre-Litigation Mediation By Seeking Urgent Interim Relief Without Reasonable Grounds: J&K High Court

Case-Title: M/s Devyani International Limited vs Airport Authority of India and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 127

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that under the Commercial Courts Act, a party does not have an absolute choice to bypass the statutorily mandated pre-litigation mediation by praying for interim relief without justifying the same with reasonable grounds.

Publishing Notice Only In English Newspaper Without Giving Mandatory Notice In Regional Language Vitiates Land Acquisition Proceedings: J&K HC

Case-Title:- Rattan Chand & Ors vs UT OF J&K & ORS

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 128

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court ruled that not publishing the notices as provided under the land acquisition Act for the benefit of the occupants of the land by publishing the notices in local language at conspicuous places vitiates the entire acquisition proceedings.

Failure To Communicate Rejection Of Detenue's Representation In Time Vitiates Detention Order: J&K High Court

Case Title: Mohd Iqbal Koka Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 129

Emphasizing the importance of procedural safeguards in preventive detention cases, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court ruled that the government's failure to communicate the rejection of a detenue's representation in a time-bound manner is sufficient to vitiate the detention order.

Plea Of Non-Compliance With S.154 CrPC Need Not Be Looked At When Chargesheet Is Filed Disclosing Commission Of Offence: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Mohammad Imran Ganai And Anr. Vs Government Through Police Station Dangiwacha

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 130

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court observed that the requirement of checking the non-compliance of the provisions of section 154 CrPC was not needed at the stage when the investigation in the matter was complete and chargesheet had already been filed disclosing the commission of the cognizable offence.

Delay In Receiving Award Due To Default In Paying Arbitral Fees Cannot Be Held Against Party Seeking To Challenge Award While Calculating Limitation: J&K HC

Case-Title: Chief Engineer PW(R&B) Department and another vs M/s Abdul Salam Mir

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 131

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that since the delivery of a signed copy of the arbitral award was the mandatory requirement under the arbitration act therefore, the limitation for challenging the said award would arise only after the said signed copy is received by the party seeking to challenge the same.

PSC Has No Locus To Defend Selection Process When Candidate Whose Appointment Was Set Aside By CAT Chose Not To Agitate Matter: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Dr. Rajeev Gupta vs U.T. of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 132

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court dismissed a review petition filed by the J&K Public Service Commission, holding that a constitutional body had no locus standi in defending a selection which was set aside by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), considering the fact that the candidate whose appointment was set aside had not bothered to agitate the issue.

"No Evidence Of Illegal Activities": J&K High Court Dismisses PIL Alleging Exploitation Of Women, Illegal Acts At Adhyatmik Vishva Vidyalaya

Case Title: Dogra Sangathan Vs State of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 133

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) alleging illegal activities, including exploitation and confinement of women, at the centres of Adhyatmik Vishva Vidyalaya run by spiritual leader Virender Dev Dikshit.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice M A Chowdhary concluded that the petition lacked merit after a thorough investigation by multiple committees and senior government officials.

J&K High Court Denies Bail To Hotelier Who Allegedly Harbored Foreign Terrorists, Provided Them SIM Cards

Case Title: Javaid Ahmad Bhat Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 134

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the bail plea of Javaid Ahmad Bhat, a Srinagar-based hotelier accused of sheltering two foreign terrorists in his hotel and residence, and facilitating their activities by arranging SIM cards.

Officers Cannot Claim Seniority Based On Unfilled Vacancies From Previous Years, Actual Date Of Promotion Only Valid Criterion For Hierarchy: J&K HC

Case Title: UT Of J&K Vs Ghulam Nabi Itoo & Ors

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 135

Clarifying the fundamental principles governing bureaucratic promotions, the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court decisively ruled that administrative officers cannot claim seniority based on unfilled vacancies from previous years, establishing that the actual date of promotion remains the only valid criterion for determining service hierarchy.

SRO Benefits Wrongfully Granted To Employee Cannot Be Recovered By Withdrawing Amounts From Salary: J&K High Court

Case-Title: UT of J&K through its Commissioner vs Kashmiri Lal

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 136

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that if benefits under Self-Regulatory Organisation (SRO) scheme is wrongfully granted to the employee by the department without any fraud or misrepresentation played by the employee, the department is not at liberty to recover the same by effecting it from the salary of the employee or pensioner at any given point of time.

Accused Cannot Be Put Under Preventive Detention On Grounds That Releasing Him On Bail Affects Public Confidence: J&K High Court

Case-Title: Adil Hussain Mir vs UT of JK and others

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 137

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that mere fact that a person has secured bail from the court cannot be grounds for imposing preventive detention on the pretext of an apprehension that enlargement of the detenu will have an impact upon public faith.