Disposed

Mohammad Yaseen (Ladakh Case) v. Union Territory of Ladakh and Ors. (Cooperative Socities)

J&K HC18 Sept 2026WP(C)/152/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to compel the respondents to release his pay and grade as Assistant Registrar, Cooperative from September 2014. The court noted that a Government Order dated 24.09.2025 had already regularized his service with effect from 08.09.2016. The petition was disposed of with a direction to implement the order within six weeks, while preserving the petitioner's right to challenge the order's effective date.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to release pay and grade of Assistant Registrar, Cooperative in accordance with Government Order No. 35-JK(Coop) of 2025 dated 24.09.2025 within six weeks; petitioner granted liberty to challenge the said order.

Mohammad Yaseen (Ladakh Case) Vs Union Territory… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | J&K HC (2026)

¶1

Serial No.14 Regular Cause List

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR

¶3

WP(C) 152/2024 CM(262/2024)

MOHAMMAD YASEEN

…PETITIONER(S)

Through:

Mr. Mohammad Ismail, Advocate

¶8

V/s.

¶9

UNION TERRITORY OF LADAKH AND ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶10

Through: Mr. T.M. Shamsi, DSGI with Mr. Faizan Ahmad Ganie, CGC Mr. Faheem Nisar Shah, GA

¶11

CORAM:

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE. ORDER

¶13

18.09.2026

¶14

Petitioner has invoked writ jurisdiction of this Court for the issuance of an appropriate writ of mandamus directing the respondents to provide him pay and grade of Assistant Registrar, Cooperative with effect from September, 2014 up to the date of his superannuation i.e., April, 2021.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of Government Order No. 35-JK(Coop) of 2025 dated 24.09.2025, whereby on the recommendation of the J&K Public Service Commission/Departmental Promotion Committee sanction has been accorded to the regularization of 91 Incharge Assistant Registrars as Assistant Registrars in the Cooperative Department in the Pay Level 6F (40800-129200), with effect from the dates shown against each of them. Petitioner figures at Serial No. 56, which reveals that he has been accorded the benefit with effect from 08.09.2016.

¶16

Copy of the order is taken on record.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, despite issuance of the aforesaid order dated 24.09.2025 , respondents, till date, MIR ARIF MANZOORI attest to the accuracy and have not released the pay and grade to which he has been found authenticity of this document 19.09.26

¶18

entitled. He submits that petitioner would be satisfied if respondents are directed to release the said pay and grade within a stipulated time frame.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that though petitioner is entitled to the pay and grade from September, 2014, respondents have granted sanction for regularization of his service in the pay level with effect from 08.09.2016. Therefore, petitioner be given liberty to assail the aforesaid order. Statement of learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record.

¶20

In view of the above, present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the pay and grade of the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative in favour of the petitioner in the light of the aforesaid order dated 24.09.2025, within a period of six weeks from the date a copy of this order is made available.

¶21

Petitioner shall, however, be at liberty to assail the aforesaid Government order dated 24.09.2025, to the extent permissible in law.

¶22

Disposed of along with connected CM(s).

¶23

(RAJESH SEKHRI) JUDGE

¶24

SRINAGAR: 18.09.2026 “Mir Arif”

¶25

MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶26

19.09.26

Mohammad Yaseen (Ladakh Case) v. Union Territory of Ladakh and Ors. (Cooperative Socities)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Yaseen (Ladakh Case) v. Union Territory of Ladakh and Ors. (Cooperative Socities)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases