Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/2733/2026 of SHRI MATA VAISHNO DEVI E RIKSHAW TH HARMEET SINGH Vs UT OF J AND K TH COMMISSIONER SECRETARY TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS on 31 August 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 2733/2026 CM No. 5998/2026 Shri Mata Vaishno Devi E Rikshaw Th. Harmeet Singh …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Satyajeet, Advocate vs UT of J&K and ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Meenakshi Salathia, Dy. AG
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 2733/2026
CM No. 5998/2026
Shri Mata Vaishno Devi E Rikshaw
Th. Harmeet Singh
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Satyajeet, Advocate
vs
UT of J&K and ors.
.…. Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Meenakshi Salathia, Dy. AG (Th. V.C.)
for R-1 & 5
Ms. Nisha Kangotra, Advocate vice
Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG for R-2 to 4
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
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
31.08.2026
1. The petitioner is a Union representing the persons who are plying their E-Rikshaw and E-Auto in the Union Territory of J&K. The grievance of the petitioner-Union is that their representation for issuance of necessary directions and clarification with respect to installation of fare-meter and zone plates for E-Rikshaw, E-Auto and E-Carts made to the respondents is not being considered and instead they are being harassed at the time of registration and plying of the vehicles.
2. It has been contended that order dated 11.10.2025 issued by the District Magistrate, Jammu under Section 163 BNSS has lost its efficacy inasmuch as the same was valid only for two months but still under the garb of the said order, the members of the petitioner-Union are being harassed while plying their vehicles. It has been further contended that in the notification dated 29.04.2026, issued vide S.O. 126, it is not clarified, as to whether the rates fixed are based on Serial No. 15
2 WP(C) No. 2733/2026
number of passengers or the same are based upon a trip. This, according to the petitioner, is causing confusion in the minds of the commuters as well as those plying the vehicles. It has been submitted that the clarification in this regard was sought by the petitioner-Union but no action is being taken by the respondents in the matter.
3. Notice to the respondents.
4. Ms. Meenakshi Salathia, Dy. AG accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 5. Ms. Nisha Kangotra, Advocate appearing vice Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 4.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the nature of relief being sought by the petitioner, the petition can be disposed of at this stage by extending direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 22.08.2026 of the petitioner-Union made to them, which is annexed as Annexure ‘VI’ to the present writ petition.
7. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the aforesaid representation in accordance with the rules and guidelines holding the field, most expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date a copy of this order is made available to the respondents.
8. Disposed of.
(SANJAY DHAR)
JUDGE
Jammu 31.08.2026 Neha-II NEHA KUMARI 2026.09.01 10:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document