Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/1837/2025 of RIFLEMAN ARIF AHMAD GANIE Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. (DEFENCE) on 4 November 2025
No.06 REGULAR CAUSE LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(4825/2025) IN WP(C) 1837/2025 RIFLEMAN ARIF AHMAD GANIE …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Tahir Ahmad Bhat, Advocate Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. T.M. Shamsi, DSGI with Ms
Serial No.06
REGULAR CAUSE LIST
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
CM(4825/2025) IN WP(C) 1837/2025
RIFLEMAN ARIF AHMAD GANIE
…Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. Tahir Ahmad Bhat, Advocate
Vs.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
...Respondent(s)
Through:
Mr. T.M. Shamsi, DSGI with
Ms Rehana Qayoom, CGC
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, 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
04.11.2025
1. Impugned in this petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is an order and judgment dated 1st April, 2024, passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Srinagar At Jammu [“the Tribunal”] in OA No. 36 of 2024, whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the OA of the petitioner at the threshold without inviting objections from the respondents.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment impugned, we are of the considered opinion that the Tribunal ought to have called for a response from the respondents before coming to the Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 07.11.2025
conclusion that the allegations made by the petitioner in the OA were factually incorrect. It is true that part of the story projected by the petitioner in the OA seems to be improbable, yet nothing conclusive could be said unless the response from the respondents is elicited and considered in the light of the relevant record.
3. For the forging reasons, we allow this petition, and set aside the impugned order dated 1st April, 2024, passed in OA No. 36 of 2024, and remit the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication after inviting the objections from the respondents and going through the record.
4. Disposed of.
5. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 27.11.2025.
(SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR)
JUDGE
JUDGE
SRINAGAR: 04.11.2025 “ARIF” Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 07.11.2025