Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1590 (JK)

KAMIL MAJEED DAR v. UNION OF INDIA TH.SECRETARY TO DEFENCE AND OTHERS

WP(C)/1403/2026 · 2026-06-30

Shahzad Azeem

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Serial No. 98 Supplementary-1 Cause List HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP (C) No. 1403/2026 CM No. 3723/2026 Kamil Majeed Dar … Petitioner(s) Through: - Mr Gulzar Ahmad Bhat, Advocate. V/s Union of India & Ors. … Respondent(s) Through: - Ms Beenish Latief, Advocate vice Mr Tahir Majid Shamsi, DSGI. CORAM: HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SHAHZAD AZEEM, JUDGE. (ORDER) 30.06.2026 01. The Petitioner, through the medium of the instant Writ Petition, seeks a direction upon the Respondents, thereby directing them to issue order of appointment in his favour under SRO 43 of 1994 in lieu of the death/ martyrdom of his father, who is stated to have died in harness while working with the Respondents as a Rifleman. 02. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has already submitted a representation before the Respondents for seeking consideration of his appointment under SRO 43 of 1994, however, despite receipt of the said representation, the Respondents have not chosen to take any follow up action with respect thereto. He submits that the Petitioner shall feel satisfied in case the present Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Respondents to accord consideration to the representation of the Petitioner within some reasonable timeframe. 03. Ms Beenish Latief, learned Advocate, appearing vice Mr Tahir Majid Shamsi, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing on behalf of the Respondents, would submit that the Respondents shall have no serious objection in case the present Petition is disposed of by directing the Respondents to accord consideration to the representation, if any, filed by the Petitioner in accordance with rules. 04. Having regard to the nature of controversy involved and with the consensus of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, this Writ Petition, at this stage, is disposed of with a direction to the Respondents to consider and decide the representation, if any, filed by the Petitioner for seeking consideration of his case under SRO 43 of 1994, in accordance with the mandate of law/ Rules governing the subject, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this Order. 05. Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of in the above terms, along with the connected CM. (SHAHZAD AZEEM) JUDGE SRINAGAR 30th June, 2026 “TAHIR” Tahir Manzoor Bhat I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document