Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/455/2026 of M/S SHSS ASSOCIATED TH SUKHBIR SINGH Vs UNION OF INDIA TH MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI AND OTHERS on 25 February 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(C) No. 455/2026 CM No. 1061/2026 M/S SHSS Associates Through its Prop Sukhbir Singh S/O Sh. Surat Singh R/O H. No. 257, Sector 9, Nanak Nagar, Jammu …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sumir Pandita, Advocate 1. Union of India Through
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(C) No. 455/2026
CM No. 1061/2026
M/S SHSS Associates
Through its Prop
Sukhbir Singh
S/O Sh. Surat Singh
R/O H. No. 257, Sector 9,
Nanak Nagar, Jammu
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Sumir Pandita, Advocate
1. Union of India
Through the Ministry of Defense
New Delhi.
2. Chief Engineer, Northern Command.
3. Chief Engineer, Uhdampur Zone
4. Commander Works Engineer Akhnoor.
5. Commander Works Engineer Nagrota.
6. Garrison Engineer, Samba
.…. Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Sumant Sudan, Advocate vice Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, 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
(25.02.2026)
1. The petitioner-M/S SHSS Associates has filed this petition seeking quashment of adverse remark marked as “NO” against the petitioner in the Work Load Return (WLR) and also to direct the respondents to consider the technical bids submitted by the petitioner in the tenders issued by CWE Akhnoor and GE Samba, strictly in accordance with law, with further direction to restrain the respondents from disqualifying the petitioner from participation in tenders on the basis of the impugned adverse entry in the Work Load Return (WLR).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the remark “NO” has been entered against the petitioner in Work Load Return (WLR) on the allegation that Serial No. 168
2 WP(C) No. 455/2026
he could not start the work allotted, whereas, the fact of the matter is that due to official wrangles at the end of the respondents, the work could not be started.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to a representation dated 18.02.2026 made by the petitioner to Chief Engineer, Udhampur Zone, against the rejection of Tenders-CA Nos. CWE/JA-25/2025-26, CEW/JA-29/2025-26, CEW/JA-32/2025-26, CEW/JA-39/2025-26, CEW/JA- 40/2025-26, & CEW/JA-41/2025-26 and submits that the petitioner will be satisfied in case the petition is disposed of at this stage with a direction to the respondent-Chief Engineer, Udhampur Zone to consider the representation filed by the petitioner and take a decision thereon.
4. Mr. Sumant Sudan, Assisting Counsel appearing vice Mr. Vishal Sharma, learned DSGI submit that the respondents are not averse to the plea raised by the petitioner for consideration of the representation.
5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case pleaded in the petition and submissions urged at the bar, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-Chief Engineer, Udhampur Zone, to consider representation dated 18.02.2026 filed by the petitioner and take a decision thereon, expeditiously, at his end, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date, a certified copy of this order is served upon him.
6. Petition is, accordingly, disposed of along with pending application(s).
(M A CHOWDHARY)
JUDGE Jammu 25.02.2026 Tarun/PS
Tarun Kumar Gupta 2026.02.26 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document