RAJINDER SAPRU HCOURT v. J AND K HIGH COURT TH.REGISTRAR GENERAL
SWP/1635/2011 · 2026-02-26
Sanjay Parihar, Sanjeev Kumar
body2011
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2011 DAILYLAW 755 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2011 DAILYLAW 755 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
SWP No. 1635/2011 Page 1 of 2
Sr. No. 09 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Case:- SWP No. 1635/2011 IA No. 2390/2011
Date of Pronouncement:- 26.02.2026 Uploaded on:- 27.02.2026
Rajinder Sapru …. Petitioner (s)
Through:- Mr. J A Hamal, Advocate & Ms. Deeksha Handoo, Advocate. V/s
J&K High Court …..Respondent(s)
Through:- None.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER (ORAL)
(Per:- Sanjeev Kumar-J)
1. In the instant petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent to permit him to participate in the process of viva-voce and consider him for appointment to the post of District Judge, which was notified in terms of Advertisement Notification dated
25.06.2010.
2. On being put to notice, the respondent has filed the objections and has stated that the selection process started in terms of the Advertisement Notification (supra) stands completed and that no candidate has been selected and appointed under general category, in which the petitioner
SWP No. 1635/2011 Page 2 of 2
had applied. There was only a single candidate under Scheduled Tribe Category, who was selected.
3. Having regard to the nature of controversy involved and the reliefs prayed for, this petition, for all practical purposes, has been rendered infructuous and the same is, accordingly, dismissed, along with connected application. (Sanjay Parihar) (Sanjeev Kumar)
Judge
Judge
Jammu 26.02.2026 Ram Krishan
Ram Krishan 2026.02.27 13:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document