Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
M/S Shabnum Stone Crusher T vs Union Territory Of J And K And on 19 February, 2026
Serial No. 66
Suppl. Cause List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 296/2026 CM (745/2026)
M/S Shabnum Stone Crusher T.
Proprietor ...Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s).
Through: Mr. Danish Yousuf, Advocate.
Vs.
Union Territory of J and K and
Others. ...Respondent(s).
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE
ORDER
19.01.2026
1. Issue notice to the respondents in the main as well as in the interim
application returnable by the next date of hearing subject to taking of steps for
service within a week’s period for filing of reply/objections.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner in respect of his prayer
for grant of relief in the interim application bearing No. CM 748/2026 and
considered his submissions.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner during his arguments, inter
alia, submitted that the impugned order has been passed by an incompetent
authority and that too in utter violation of principles of natural justice.
4. The learned counsel in support of his arguments placed reliance on the
judgment of this Court titled “M/S New B N Stone Crusher vs. UT of J&K and
Others” passed in WP(C) No. 925/2021, para-13 whereof is reproduced for ready
reference:
“13. Applying the aforesaid principles of the instant case, it is abundantly
clear that the imposition of huge penalty that too on the basis of material
not shared with the petitioner has resulted in serious breach of audi alteram
partem rule in its entirety. The petitioner has been condemned unheard and
the impugned order has visited him with serious civil consequences. Had
the respondents put the petitioner on notice and supplied to him all the
material relied upon for drawing the order impugned, the petitioner would
have got an opportunity to explain, rebut or contradict the same. A serious
prejudice has been caused to the petitioner by denying them an opportunity
of being heard and by passing an ex-parte order. As is apparent from
reading of the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner has set up
a fairly probable case in his defense but has been disabled to put it up before
the respondents because of unilateral and behind the back action of the
respondents. I have, therefore, no doubt in mind that in the instant case by
not complying with the audi alteram partem rule, the respondents have
caused serious prejudice to the petitioner and have acted in a manner,
which is unfair and arbitrary and, therefore, violative of Article 14 of the
Constitution”.
5. The learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner also invited the attention of
this Court to the Jammu and Kashmir Stone Crushers/Hot and Wet Mixing Plants
Regulation Rules, 2021.
6. Perused the interim application which is supported with an affidavit. Also
perused the main petition and the copies of documents enclosed with the same as
annexures thereto.
7. List on 30th March, 2026.
8. In the meantime, subject to any vacation/modification upon the
consideration of objections/arguments of the other side and till next date of hearing
before the Bench, the operation of the impugned notice bearing No
DMO/ANGB/F-Crusher/1683-85, dated: 17.12.2025 shall remain stayed.
(MOHD YOUSUF WANI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
19.01.2026
Shahid Manzoor
