Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 295 (JK)

M/S MIRSONS CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD TH MOHAMMAD FAROOQ AHMED MIR v. UNION OF INDIA TH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE NEW DELHI AND OTHERS

WP(C)/511/2025 · 2026-04-01

Wasim Sadiq Nargal

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case: WP(C) No. 511/2025 CM No. 1725/2026 M/s Mirsons Constructions Pvt. Ltd. ..... Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through :- Mr. Pranav Khajuria, Advocate Vs Union of India and Ors. .....Respondent(s) Through :- Mr. Sumant Sudan, Advocate vice Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI for R- 1 to 6 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE ORDER 01.04.2026 CM No. 1725/2026 1. The instant application has been filed for placing on record the communication dated 18.02.2026 sent by the non-applicants to the applicant in the instant writ petition, which, according to learned counsel for the applicant, would facilitate this Court in clinching the controversy in question. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant in the instant application and perused the contents thereof. 3. For the reasons stated in the application coupled with the submissions made at the Bar, the same is allowed. The communication dated 18.02.2026 is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. 4. This application is, accordingly, disposed of. Sr. No. 37 2 | P a g e WP(C) No. 511/2025 WP(C) No. 511/2025 1. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the communication dated 18.02.2026, annexed as Annexure-I with CM No. 1725/2026, which now stands taken on record. 2. A perusal thereof reveals that the petitioner has been intimated that, in case he intends to proceed with revocation of cancellation of the subject CA and is willing to execute the work, he is required to submit a detailed work plan and withdraw the court case filed by him against the said cancellation. 3. In light of the aforesaid communication, learned counsel for the petitioner submits, on instructions, that he seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition so as to enable the petitioner to submit a detailed work plan in conformity with the said communication. 4. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed work plan in terms of communication dated 18.02.2026 issued by the concerned AE Civil on behalf of the Chief Engineer. 5. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn in the manner indicated above. (WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE JAMMU 01.04.2026 Mihul