Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/2203/2024 of SAMEER AHMAD MIR Vs REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT OF J AND K AND LADAKH AND ORS on 29 October 2025
Regular Cause List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 2203/2024 CM(5902/2024 c/w WP(C) 2419/2025 CM(6423/2025) SAMEER AHMAD MIR …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s). Through: Mr. Asif Nabi, Advocate vice Mr. Aushaq Hussain, Advocate Vs. REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT
Serial No. 23
Regular Cause List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 2203/2024
CM(5902/2024 c/w
WP(C) 2419/2025
CM(6423/2025)
SAMEER AHMAD MIR
…Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s).
Through:
Mr. Asif Nabi, Advocate vice
Mr. Aushaq Hussain, Advocate
Vs.
REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH
COURT OF J AND K AND
LADAKH AND ORS
...Respondent(s).
Through:
Mr. Aatir Kawoosa, Advocate
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
29.10.2025 WP(C) 2203/2024, CM(5902/2024)
1. The petitioner in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to challenge Advertisement Notification 04 of 2024/RR/RC dated 29.07.2024 insofar as it pertains to vacancy of Lift Operator.
2. The petitioner also prays for a direction to the respondents to conclude the pending selection and declare the result for the post of Lift Operator in terms of Advertisement Notice No. 417 of 2015.
3. On being put on notice, the respondent-High Court of J&K & Ladakh has filed response supported by an affidavit of the then Registrar General of the High Court of J&K & Ladakh.
4. It is submitted that the selection process which was initiated in terms of Advertisement Notice No. 417 of 2015, could not be concluded as the Committee for appointment and promotion of officials/officers of the High Court staff did not take it to the logical end. The said post was re- advertised along with other vacancies in the year 2022 and the selection was finalized and appointments were made in the year 2023.
5. It is, thus, submitted that the post which was subject matter of selection in terms of advertisement notification issued in the year 2015, came to be filled up in terms of advertisement notification that was issued in the year 2022.
6. In the year 2024, a fresh post had become available and the same was put to selection in terms of advertisement notice which is impugned in this petition.
7. It was, thus, contended that the post against which the petitioner is staking his claim, stood already filled up in the selection process initiated in the year 2022 and finalized with the appointment of selected candidates in the year 2023, and, therefore, the petitioner has no cause to maintain this petition.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, we are of the considered opinion that no cause of action survived to the petitioner to file the instant petition and to call in question the Advertisement Notification No. 04 of 2024 dated 29.07.2024, for the reason that the post against which the petitioner is taking his claim on the basis of his participation stood filled up after a proper selection made by the respondents in pursuance of an advertisement notification issued in the year 2022. The post of Lift Operator which has been notified in terms of advertisement notification dated 29.07.2024 is a fresh post in which the petitioner herein has not participated. Even the selection in pursuance of Advertisement Notification of 2024 has been finalized and selected candidates appointed.
9. For the foregoing reasons we find no merit in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed.
WP(C) 2419/2025 ,CM(6423/2025)
1. In the instant petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 04.09.2025, whereby the respondent No. 5 & 6 have been appointed as Lift Operators in terms of the selection process initiated in terms of Advertisement Notification No. 04 of 2024 dated 29.07.2024, in which the petitioner has admittedly not participated .
2. In view of the fact that the petitioner has not participated in the selection process initiated in terms of Advertisement Notification No. 04 of 2024, he has no locus standi to challenge the selection process or the appointments made in pursuance thereto.
3. This petition too is found devoid of any merit, and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
(SANJAY PARIHAR)
(SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE
JUDGE SRINAGAR 29.10.2025 “S.Nuzhat”