GHULAM MOHAMMAD DHOBI AND ANOTHER v. COMMISSIONER / SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT) AND OTHERS
WP(C)/483/2026 · 2026-09-08
Rajnesh Oswal
Writ Petition (Civil)body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2862 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2862 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Sr. No.49 Regular List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 483/2026 CM(1263/2026)
GHULAM MOHAMMAD DHOBI AND ANOTHER(SENIOR CITIZEN)
…Petitioner(s)/appellant(s) Through: Mr. Arshad Andrabi, Advocate with Ms. Humaira Shafi, Advocate
Vs. COMMISSIONER / SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT) AND OTHERS
...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Illyas Nazir Laway, GA with Ms. Raheela Khan, Assisting Cousel CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
O R D E R 08-09-2026
1. The short grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is that their application for building permission has been refused solely on the ground of non-availability of an approach road to the site of the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are certain factual aspects of the case which have not been taken note of by respondent No.3 while rejecting the case of the petitioners for grant of building permission. He further submits that the present writ petition be treated as a representation and respondent No. 3 be directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioners for grant of building permission afresh in the light of the averments made in the writ petition/representation.
3. Disposed of accordingly.
4. This Court is sanguine that respondent No.3 shall pass appropriate orders in the matter within a period of one month from the date a copy of this order is served upon him.
5. Needless to say, this Court has not examined the merits of the claim of either party.
(RAJNESH OSWAL)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR 08-09-2026
Shameem H.