Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/73/2020 of SUSHMA GUPTA AND ORS. ( LRs. OF LT.SH.PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA) Vs UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR THROUGH COMMISSIONER/SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT on 28 September 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP (C) No. 73/2020 CM No. 114/2020 1. Sushma Gupta, (64 years) W/O Late Sh. Pawan Kumar Gupta R/O H. No. 13, Sector 2A, Lakshmi Enclave, Trikuta Nagar, Jammu. 2. Prachi Gupta, (37 years) D/O Late Sh. Pawan Kumar Gupta R/O H. No. 2A, Lane No. 20A, Tawi
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
1. Sushma Gupta, (64 years)
W/O Late Sh. Pawan Kumar Gupta
R/O H. No. 13, Sector 2A, Lakshmi
Enclave, Trikuta Nagar, Jammu.
2. Prachi Gupta, (37 years)
D/O Late Sh. Pawan Kumar Gupta
R/O H. No. 2A, Lane No. 20A,
Tawi Vihar, Sidhara, Jammu
at present 17-B6 Abu Hail Deira,
Dubai.
3. Priyanka Gupta, (34 years)
D/O Late Sh. Pawan Kumar Gupta
R/O 1st Floor, House No. 675,
Sector-21A, Faridabad Haryana.
…. Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Jugal Kishore Gupta, Advocate
Vs
1. Union Territory of J&K, through
Commissioner/Secretary to Govt.
Revenue Department, Civil Secretariat, Jammu.
2. Divisional Commissioner, Jammu.
3. Deputy Commissioner, Jammu
Wazarat Road, Jammu.
4. Mrs. Sarita Chauhan, IAS
Deputy Commissioner, Jammu.
5. Tehsildar, Jammu
6. Tehsildar, Bahu District Jammu.
7. Saroj Gupta
W/O Late Sh. Sita Ram
R/O H. No. 312, Sarwal, Jammu.
8. Jatinder Gupta
S/O Late Sh. Gian Chand
R/O Adarsh Enclave, Trikuta Nagar, Jammu.
9. Chander Gupta
S/O Late Sh. Sain Dass
R/O 26/6, Trikuta Nagar, Jammu.
.…. Respondent(s)
Through:
Mr. Nisha Kangotra, Assisting Counsel to Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG for R-1 to 6
Mr. A.G. Sheikh, Advocate for R-7
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MA CHOWDHARY, JUDGE
Sr. No. 13
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
28.09.2026
01. The petitioners, through the medium of this petition, have prayed for the following reliefs: “i) Writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the order No. DCJ/DP/2019-20/763 dated 02.07.2019 passed by the respondent No. 3;
ii) Writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the report dated 25.05.2019 submitted by respondent No. 6 to the respondent No. 3 as well as the camp-enquiry report submitted by the respondent No. 5 the respondent No. 3, which formed the basis of order dated 02.07.2019;
iii) Writ, order, or direction in the nature of Mandamus, commanding upon the respondent No. 3 to produce the entire record pertaining to the passing of order dated 02.07.2019 including the record pertaining to the aforesaid enquiries conducted by respondents Nos. 5 & 6, before this Hon’ble Court;
iv) Writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition, restraining the respondent No. 4 from dealing with or passing any orders on the application pending before her;
v) Writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to entrust fresh adjudication of the inter-se claim of petitioners and respondents Nos. 7 to 9 to some independent and impartial authority.”
02. Objections to the petition have been filed on behalf of respondent No. 7, controverting the assertions made in the petition.
03. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this petition may be disposed of, at this stage, with a direction to respondent No. 5-Tehsildar, Jammu, to disburse the amount under the One Time Settlement Scheme for the families of the displaced persons of Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir, 1947, Chamb DPs of 1965 and 1971 (Camp/Non-camp) and to pay the same to respondent No. 7, after determining the shares of the petitioners as well as respondent Nos. 7 to 9.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that the petitioner is already in receipt of an amount of Rs.2,75,000/- and has deposited half of the amount received as full and final payment earlier with respondent No.6.
05. Learned counsel for respondent No. 7, however, without raising any serious objection to the plea raised by the petitioners, submits that respondent Nos. 8 & 9, who are unrepresented before this Court, have already laid no claim to the amount and the respondent-competent authority can look into that aspect of the matter.
06. In view of the consensus of learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the pleadings and the submissions urged at the Bar, this petition is disposed of, at this stage, with a direction to respondents to decide the matter with regard to the claims/shares of the petitioners and respondent Nos. 7 to 9 in respect of the amount to be received by the family, of course, having regard to the decisions taken by the authorities earlier in the matter, expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months and as per the scheme formulated in this behalf. Untill the final decision is taken by the respondents, the amount lying with respondent No. 6 shall not be disbursed, to any of the contesting parties.
07. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of, on the above terms, along with the connected application(s).
(MA Chowdhary) Judge
Jammu 28.09.2026 Nikhil