MOHD.SHABIR AND ORS. v. STATE TH.P.H.E.DEPTT.AND ORS.
SWP/2129/2017 · 2026-04-24
Sindhu Sharma
body2017
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2017 DAILYLAW 1174 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2017 DAILYLAW 1174 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Sr. No. 27
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
SWP No. 2129/2017
Mohd. Shabir and others
…. Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through:- None.
V/s
State of J&K and others …..Respondent(s)
Through:- None.
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
ORDER 24.04.2026
1. The petitioners, through the medium of the present petition, seek issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to compute and disburse the unpaid salary of the petitioners, which has been withheld illegally and arbitrarily for the last about two years.
2. The petitioners further seek a direction to the respondents to register them on the Biometric System in vogue in the Public Health Engineering Department, Government of Jammu and Kashmir, on the same analogy and principle on which such facility/benefit has been extended to other similarly situated persons, in light of the order dated 12.06.2017 issued by the Chief Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Jammu, read with Circular No. 2-F of 2017 dated 15.06.2017, and in consideration of the repeated representations submitted by the petitioners.
3. The respondents, in their objections, have stated that the petitioners are so called Volunteer Workers, as stated by the Assistant Executive Engineer, PHE Sub-Division, Mendhar, vide communication dated 11.05.2017,
SWP No. 2129/2017
therefore, they are not entitled for any wages. It is further submitted that no worker of such category has been registered under the Biometric System.
4. Otherwise also, the present petition involves disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. It is also pertinent to note that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners on the last date of hearing. Even today, none has caused appearance on their behalf. It, thus, appears that the petitioners are no longer interested in pursuing the present writ petition. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed in default of appearance and for non-prosecution.
(SINDHU SHARMA) JUDGE
Jammu: 24.04.2026 Michal Sharma/PS