TUSHANT PANSOTRA v. UT OF J AND K TH CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER KATHUA AND OTHERS
WP(C)/2437/2025 · 2025-09-03
Sanjay Dhar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4670 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4670 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
WP (C) No. 2437/2025 CM No. 5631/2025
Tushant Pansotra …..Appellants
Through: Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K and ors.
.…. Respondents
Through: Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG Ms. Nisha Kangotra, Advocate vice Mr. S.S Nanda, Sr. AAG
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER 03.09.2025
1. The grievance of the petitioner is that he is being unnecessarily harassed and interfered with during the process of collection of lorry (vehicle) adda entry fee/entry tax at various locations within the jurisdiction of Municipal Committee, Parole, Kathua despite he having been granted authority to collect the lorry (vehicle) adda entry fee/entry tax for the year, 2024-25 w.e.f 01.04.2024 to 31.03.2026 as per the sanctioned schedule rates of Municipal Committee, Parole in terms of MC/P/2025-26/1081-86 dated 31.03.2025 after having participated in the tender process.
2. It has been contended that the respondents are at the behest of an unsuccessful bidder, trying to interfere in petitioner’s collection of entry fee/entry tax.
3. Issue notice to the respondents. Ms. Nisha Kangotra, Advocate appearing vice Mr. S.S Nanda, learned Sr. AAG accepts Sr. No. 143
2 WP (C) No. 2437/2025
notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4. Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate appearing vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, learned Sr. AAG accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 3, 5 & 6. They seek and are granted time to file reply.
4. Having regard to the nature of relief that is being sought, the petition can be disposed of at threshold itself by extending appropriate directions to the respondents.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere in the collection of entry fee/entry tax by the petitioner in accordance with terms and conditions as are attached to his allotment order without adopting due process of law.
6.
Disposed of.
(SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU
03.09.2025
Tarun/PS
Whether the order is speaking? Yes Whether the order is reportable? No
Mahavir Singh 2025.09.09 15:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document