Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/483/2026 of GHULAM MOHAMMAD DHOBI AND ANOTHER Vs COMMISSIONER / SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT) AND OTHERS on 8 September 2026
Regular List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 483/2026 CM(1263/2026) GHULAM MOHAMMAD DHOBI AND ANOTHER(SENIOR CITIZEN) …Petitioner(s)/appellant(s) Through: Mr. Arshad Andrabi, Advocate with Ms. Humaira Shafi, Advocate Vs. COMMISSIONER / SECRETARY TO
Sr. No.49
Regular List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 483/2026 CM(1263/2026)
GHULAM
MOHAMMAD
DHOBI
AND
ANOTHER(SENIOR CITIZEN)
…Petitioner(s)/appellant(s)
Through:
Mr. Arshad Andrabi, Advocate with
Ms. Humaira Shafi, Advocate
Vs.
COMMISSIONER
/
SECRETARY
TO
GOVERNMENT
(HOUSING
AND
URBAN
DEVELOPMENT) AND OTHERS
...Respondent(s)
Through:
Mr. Illyas Nazir Laway, GA with
Ms. Raheela Khan, Assisting Cousel
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, 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.
O R D E R
08-09-2026
1. The short grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is that their application for building permission has been refused solely on the ground of non-availability of an approach road to the site of the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are certain factual aspects of the case which have not been taken note of by respondent No.3 while rejecting the case of the petitioners for grant of building permission. He further submits that the present writ petition be treated as a representation and respondent No. 3 be directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioners for grant of building permission afresh in the light of the averments made in the writ petition/representation.
3. Disposed of accordingly.
4. This Court is sanguine that respondent No.3 shall pass appropriate orders in the matter within a period of one month from the date a copy of this order is served upon him.
5. Needless to say, this Court has not examined the merits of the claim of either party.
(RAJNESH OSWAL)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR 08-09-2026
Shameem H.