Serial No. 109 Supplementary Cause list HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 1481/2026 CM(3890/2026) UMER FAROOQ BEIGH …Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sikander Hayat, Advocate Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K (HOME) AND OTHERS ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. T.M Shamsi, DSGI with Ms. Shugufta Maqbool, Assisting Counsel CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE. ORDER 04.07.2026 1. By this petition, petitioner herein is seeking the following directions: a) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to ensure strict confidentiality of the identity, residential address, contact details and all other personal particulars furnished by the petitioner in connection with Complaint dated 06.02.2026 and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, in accordance with the provisions of the Whistle Blowers Protection Act,2014. b) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to take all necessary steps to ensure that the petitioner is not subjected to any form of victimisation, intimidation, coercion, harassment or retaliatory action on account of the disclosures made by him before the competent authorities. c) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 4 & 5 to assess the threat perception of the petitioner and his family members in light of the disclosures made by the petitioner before the Respondents 2 & 3, and thereafter provide such protection and security measures as may be deemed necessary and appropriate in accordance with law. d) Direct the Respondent No. 2 to submit an action taken report with respect to the complaint dated 06.02.2026 submitted by the Petitioner. e) Pass any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Mr. T.M. Shamsi, learned DSGI, was directed to seek instructions. Upon instructions, he submitted at the Bar that Sections 12 and 13 provide a mechanism under which the petitioner is required to file an application before the competent authority for the protection of his credentials. He, however, further submitted that the present petition may be treated as a representation, with a direction to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to consider the petitioner's claim, as set out in the prayer clause of the present petition, within a reasonable time frame. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not averse to the proposal made by the learned DSGI and submits that he does not wish to press prayer (c) of the present petition. 4. In view of the above, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to treat the present petition as a representation and consider the petitioner's claims, as contained in the prayer clause of the petition, excluding prayer (c), by passing a reasoned and speaking order thereon within a period of four weeks from the date of passing of this order. 5. Disposed of. (MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI) JUDGE SRINAGAR: 04.07.2026 “Adil Ismail”