Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2026 DAILYLAW 668 (JK)

BAL KRISHAN GUPTA v. UT OF J AND K TH COMMISSIONER SECRETARY TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, JAMMU AND OTHERS

WP(C)/988/2026 · 2026-04-16

Moksha Khajuria Kazmi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP(C) No. 988/2026 Page 1 of 2 Sr. No. 93 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case:-WP(C) No. 988/2026 CM No. 2181/2026 Date of Pronouncement:-16.04.2026 Uploaded on:- 16.04.2026 Bal Krishan Gupta ….Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through:- Mr. A R Khan, Advocate. V/s UT of J&K and ors. …..Respondent(s) Through:- Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate vice Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG. CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER(ORAL) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction upon respondent No. 2-Regional Transport Officer, Jammu to immediately remove the blacklisting of the vehicle from RTO records to process the transfer of ownership/registration of the vehicle in the name of the petitioner, with a further direction to respondent No. 3-Senior Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Jammu to forthwith issue No Objection Certificate for removal of the vehicle bearing Registration No. JK02BG-2800 from the blacklisting category. 2. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner herein is a bonafide purchaser of the aforesaid vehicle in a public auction conducted by respondent No. 5 after respondent No. 4-Bank WP(C) No. 988/2026 Page 2 of 2 lawfully seized the vehicle due to default in repayment of loan by its previous registered owner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that despite repeated representations, the respondents have not removed the vehicle from blacklisting category, so as to enable the petitioner to get the vehicle transferred in his name. He further states that the petitioner herein would feel satisfied, if the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 2 & 3 to accord consideration to the representation of the petitioner dated 20.03.2026 within some reasonable period of time. 4. Ms. Chetna Manhas, Assisting counsel to Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG states that she is not averse to the proposition made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Be that as it may, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 2 & 3 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 20.03.2026, by passing a speaking order thereon, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6. Disposed of along with connected application. (MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI) JUDGE JAMMU 16.04.2026 Ram Krishan Ram Krishan 2026.04.16 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document