Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/801/2026 of MOUNTAIN AND DREAMS Vs UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND OTHERS (TOURISM) on 22 April 2026
No.259 Supplementary Cause list HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 801/2026 CM(2048/2026)Caveat 747/2026 1. Mountain & Dreams through Saddam Hussain Thakeery, Aged 31 Years S/O Mohammad Iqbal Thakeery R/O Gagangir Ganderbal …Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Serial No.259
Supplementary Cause list
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 801/2026 CM(2048/2026)Caveat 747/2026
1. Mountain & Dreams through
Saddam Hussain Thakeery, Aged 31 Years
S/O Mohammad Iqbal Thakeery
R/O Gagangir Ganderbal
…Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. Mir Irfan, Advocate &
Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah, Advocate
Vs.
1. Union Territory of J&K, through
Commissioner/Secretary,
Tourism
Department,
Civil
Secretariat,
Jammu/Srinagar
2. Director
Tourism
Department
(Chairman Outsourcing Committee)
Directorate
of
Tourism
Kashmir,
Tourist Reception Centre, Srinagar
3. Chief Executive Officer, Sonamarg
Development
Authority
(SDA)
Sonamarg, Ganderbal
4. Deputy Director, Tourism (Adventure)
Directorate
of
Tourism
Kashmir,
Tourist Reception Centre, Srinagar
5. Accounts
Officer,
Sonamarg
Development
Authority
(SDA)
Sonamarg, Ganderbal
...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Haris Khan, Assisting Counsel vice Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG
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
22.04.2026 Caveat 747/2026:
1. With the appearance of Mr. Haris Khan, Assisting Counsel appearing vice Mr. Mohsin Qadri, learned Sr. AAG for caveator, caveat stands discharged. WP(C) 801/2026:
2. Petitioner, through the medium of this petition, claims to have been granted permission for installation, management and operation of Zip Line at Sonamarg, near Youth Hostel on 09.09.2023 and has asserted that the petitioner for the aforesaid work has invested huge money, as such, has prayed for the following reliefs:
a. Issue a writ of Certiorari, quashing Corrigendum No. CEO/SDA /2026/ t25 dated t0.04.2A26 and Corrigendum No.
CEO/SDA /2026/ 61 dated 11.04.2026 issued by the respondents.
b. Issue a writ of Certiorari, quashing the e-NIT dated 04.04.2026 for the reasons that the representation of the petitioner dated 09.A2.2026 seeking extension of time to operate Zipline at Sonamarg has not been considered and decided.
c. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to restore the original eligibility conditions of the tender strictly in accordance with the J&K Adventure Tourism Guidelines.
d. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to consider and decide the representations of the petitioner including representation dated 12.04.2026 submitted by the petitioner in a time-bound manner.
e. In the alternative, direct the respondents to grant extension of the petitioner's existing contract for operation of Zipline at Sonamarg for an appropriate period in view of the extraordinary circumstances and financial losses suffered.
f. Pass any other or further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner has sought quashment of E-NIT dated 04.04.2026, whereas the fact of the matter is that the petitioner has participated in the process, in response to the aforesaid E- NIT, as such, the petitioner cannot challenge the same now.
4. On this submission, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition be disposed of at this stage, with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation dated 24.03.2026, in a time bound manner.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents has not resisted this plea, for the reason that in case the petition is disposed of, the respondents shall have no difficulty in considering the representation of the petitioner.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions urged at the Bar, the present petition is disposed of, with a direction to respondents to consider the representation dated 24.03.2026 made by the petitioner expeditiously, in accordance with law.
7. The petition is thus disposed of, along with connected CM.
(M. A. CHOWDHARY)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR: 22.04.2026 “Adil Ismail”