WP(C) No. 894/2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 894/2024 Date of pronouncement :21.07.2026 Uploaded on :22.07.2026 Abdul Rashid ….Petitioner Through:- Mr. Hamid Ather, Advocate vice Mr. N. D. Qazi, Advocate V/s UT of J&K & Ors. …..Respondents Through:- Ms. Priyanka Bhat, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG Mr. Manhar Mahajan, Advocate vice Mr. Raman Sharma, AAGfor R- 2 to 4 \ CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE JUDGMENT (ORAL) - 1. It has been brought to the notice of this Court by learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No. 2 to 4 that, in compliance with the order passed by this Court on 27.05.2025, the representation submitted by the petitioner was duly considered by the competent authority. Upon such consideration, it has been found that the pleas raised by the petitioner therein were incorrect. Consequently, it was held that the petitioner was not entitled for the benefits over and above fixed and paid by the Bank. The said order of consideration was conveyed to the petitioner vide communication dated 25.06.2025. Serial No. 18 Regular List WP(C) No. 894/2024 2. While rejecting the case of the petitioner, it has been conveyed to the petitioner that the post of Senior President was created pursuant to the directions of the Board and was outside the ambit of Indian Banks’ Association (IBA), which subsequently stood abolished vide B. R. No. 20 dated 30.05.2018 and, as such, revision in scales of pay of Senior President was not considered. 3. It has also been conveyed to the petitioner that as per the revised structure, the maximum basic pay admissible to the post of General Manager was Rs. 1,29,000/-, whereas the Senior President was drawing the basic pay of R. 1,30,000/-. 4. The aforesaid communication, whereby the case of the petitioner stood rejected has been provided to this Court, which is taken on record. 5. In the light of the aforesaid development, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks withdrawal of the instant petition, with liberty to challenge the aforesaid communication whereby the case of the petitioner stood rejected, by way of appropriate proceedings, if so advised. 6. The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. (WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE JAMMU 22.07.2026 Sneha Whether the judgment is speaking: Yes/No Whether the judgment is reportable: Yes/No