Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1434 (JK)

BHARAT BHUSHAN v. UT OF J AND K TH. COMMISSIONER SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, JAMMU AND OTHERS

WP(C)/1625/2026 · 2026-06-05

Moksha Khajuria Kazmi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP (C) No. 1625/2026 Bharat Bhushan .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through :- Mr. Dheeraj Singh Katoch, Advocate v/s UT of J&K and Others .....Respondent(s) Through :- Ms. Chetna Manhas, Assisting counsel to Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER 05.06.2026 1. In this petition, the petitioner herein has challenged order dated 04.04.2026 passed by respondent no. 2, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the appointment of respondent no. 4, as Lambardar of Village Dhar, Tehsil Ramban has been dismissed. 2. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner’s father was appointed as Lambardar of village Dhar. Due to old age, the petitioner’s father was unable to discharge his duties. It is further stated that the petitioner possesses all eligibility criteria prescribed under the J&K Lambardari Act, 1972 and J&K Lambardari Rules, 1980. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that after considering the eligibility, the petitioner was appointed as Lambardar on temporary basis by respondent no. 3 on 11.02.2023 and he discharged his duties as Lambardar from the said date, but on 07.05.2024 one Mr. Mangal Singh/respondent no. 4 was appointed as Lambardar of Sr. No. 144 2 Village Dhar, Tehsil Ramban without following due procedure, including conduct of elections and fair selection. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that the petitioner challenged the appointment of respondent no. 4 as Lambardar before respondent no. 2, but his appeal came to be dismissed on the grounds that the petitioner’s appointment was temporary in nature, during verification, the petitioner was allegedly found unsuitable and there was delay in filing the appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that he would feel satisfied if the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the official respondents to conduct elections to the post of Lambardar. 6. Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate states that she is not averse to the proposition being made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. Be that as it may, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to the official respondents to conduct the elections for the post of Lambardar of Village Dhar, Tehsil Ramban within a period of three months from the date of passing of this order. 8. Disposed of. (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge JAMMU 05.06.2026 Manik