Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Pronounced On:- 14.10.2025 vs Sanjeev Kumar on 14 October, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Kumar
Bench: Sanjeev Kumar
2025:JKLHC-JMU:3376-DB
Serial No. 26
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
LPA No. 215/2025 in
WP(C) No. 1858/2024
Pronounced on:- 14.10.2025
Uploaded on :- 15.10.2025
Mohd Sahbir .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
S/o Nazir Hussain,
R/o Sangpur, Tehsil Nowshera, District
Rajouri, aged 49 years.
Through: Mr. C. M. Koul, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. A. R. Bhat, Advocate
vs
1. Sanjeev Kumar, S/o Sh. Shiv Ram, ..... Respondent(s)
R/o Sangpur, Tehsil Noswhera, District
Rajouri
2. UT of J&K th. Commissioner-cum-
Secretary to Govt. for the Deptt of
Revenue, Civil Secretariat, Jammu.
3. Deputy Commissioner, Rajouri
4. Additional District Magistrate, Rajouri
5. Tehsildar, Nowshera, District Rajouri
Through:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDER
14.10.2025
Sanjeev Kumar 'J'
1. This intra-Court appeal, filed by the appellant, namely, Mohd. Shabir
is directed against an order and judgment dated 08.08.2025 passed by
the learned Single Judge of this Court ["the Writ Court"] in WP(C)
No. 1858/2024 titled Sanjeev Kumar Vs. UT of J&K & Ors., whereby
the Writ Court, has, while allowing the writ petition of the respondent
No.1 directed the official respondents herein to conduct the elections
2025:JKLHC-JMU:3376-DB
to the post of Lambardar in Village Sangpur, Tehsil Nowshera,
District Rajouri within a period of three months from the date of
receipt of the copy of the order.
2. The impugned judgment is challenged by the appellant primarily on
the ground that the Writ Court has not taken note of the fact that in
terms of Rule 14 of the Lambardari Rules there could only be general
elections of Lambardars and not the elections for a particular revenue
village.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the
material available on record, we are of the considered opinion that the
judgment passed by the Writ Court is in consonance with law and does
not call for any interference by us in this appeal. Rule 14 of the
Lambardari Rules, which is relevant for our purpose is set out below:
14. Elections.
(1) A general election of Lambardar shall be held in
accordance with these rules, within such time and
within such areas as may be prescribed by the
Revenue Minister by a Notification in the
Government Gazette.
(2) Deleted
(3) Where a vacancy is ordered to be filled by
election, such election shall take place in
accordance with these rules and the Revenue
Minister may, in respect of the vacancy so filled
by selection, order, that no fresh election shall
take place till the next election or till the
constituency again falls vacant.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:3376-DB
(4) Subject to the provisions of Clause (a) where the
vacancy is not filled by election, the appointment
to a vacant post of Lambardar shall be made by
the Revenue Officer not below the rank of
Tehsildar subject to confirmation by the Collector
for a period not exceeding six months;
Provided that the appointee, shall possess all the
qualifications prescribed in this behalf and shall
not suffer from any disabilities that apply to the
election of the Lambardar.
4. From reading of Rule 14, it clearly transpires that the elections to the
office of Lambardar are required to be held in accordance with the
Lambardari Rules within such time and within such areas as may be
prescribed by the Revenue Minister by a notification in the
Government gazette.
5. It is, thus, abundantly clear that the elections to the post of Lambardar
can be notified by the Revenue Minister by a notification in the
Government gazette for such area as may be prescribed by it. The area
could be a village, a cluster of villages, a district, a group of districts
or even the entire Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. This has
been left to the discretion of the Revenue Minister.
6. In that view of the matter, the argument raised by Mr. C. M. Koul,
learned Senior counsel for the appellant does not have any substance
and therefore, deserves to be rejected. The apprehension of the learned
Senior counsel that the official respondents may not conduct election
for the post of Lambdardar under the Lambardari Rules is also not
well founded.
2025:JKLHC-JMU:3376-DB
7. Needless to say that whenever a direction is issued by a Court of law
to do a particular thing, such thing is required to be done in
consonance with law and not contrary to law. The direction of the
learned Single Bench, calling upon the official respondents to conduct
elections has to be viewed in this context and would always mean that
election directed to be conducted by the Writ Court is in accordance
with the Lambardari Rules in vogue.
8. Hence, this appeal is founded to be devoid of merits and the same is,
accordingly, dismissed.
(Sanjay Parihar) (Sanjeev Kumar)
Judge Judge
Jammu
14.10.2025
Vishal Sharma
Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No.
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No
