Fayaz Ahmad Wani vs Union Territory Of J And K And Others
2026 Latest Caselaw 2087 J&K/2

Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench

Fayaz Ahmad Wani vs Union Territory Of J And K And Others on 7 April, 2026

Author: Sanjay Dhar

Bench: Sanjay Dhar

                                                                      Serial No. 52.
                                                                      Regular Cause List.


      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT SRINAGAR
                                WP(C) 1054/2022
                           CM(2638/2022) CM(8617/2025)
                             c/w i)CCP(S) 504/2022

FAYAZ AHMAD WANI.
                                                                   ...Petitioner (s)
             Through:     Ms. Ainain Qadiri, Advocate.
                                         VERSUS

UNION TERRITORY OF J AND K AND OTHERS.

             Through:     Mr. Mohsin ul Showkat Qadiri, Sr. AAG with
                          Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel.
                          Mr. Faheem Nisar Shah, Government Advocate.
                                                                  ...Respondent(s)

CORAM:
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE.
                                    ORDER

07-04-2026

WP (C ) No. 1054/2022.

01. The instant Writ petition stands already admitted to hearing.

02. Reply filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 6 shall be treated as

counter-affidavit on behalf of the said respondents. The remaining respondents

shall file their counter-affidavits by the next date of hearing, with an advance copy

to learned counsel for the petitioner.

03. List the main petition for final hearing on 25th of May, 2026.

01. In Compliance Report filed by the respondents, it has been submitted

that whatever amount was due to the petitioner the same has been released in his

favour.

02. Mr. Fahim Nisar Shah, learned Government Advocate appearing on

behalf of the respondent-Zonal Education Officer, submits that the petitioner had

worked with the said office only up to December, 2014, and that wages up to the

said period have already been released in favour of the petitioner.

03. The aforesaid said position is, being strongly disputed by the learned

counsel for the petitioner. According to her the petitioner is still serving with the

respondent and he has not been paid entire wages due to him.

04. The question as to whether the petitioner is still working with the

respondent and whether he is entitled to any further wages shall be considered at

the time of final disposal of the main writ petition.

05. Accordingly, the present contempt proceedings are closed and the

contempt petition is disposed of.

(Sanjay Dhar) Judge

SRINAGAR 07-04-2026 Showkat Khan