Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Ummar Ali Gassi & Others vs Union Territory Of J&K And Ors on 18 April, 2026
Serial No.107
Supplementary Cause List-I
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 806/2026
CM(2076/2026)
Ummar Ali Gassi & Others. ...Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Aswad R. Attar, Advocate.
Vs.
Union Territory of J&K and Ors. ...Respondent(s)
Through:
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal, Judge.
ORDER
18.04.2026
01. The petitioners through the medium of the instant writ
petition have called in question the impugned action of the
respondents manifest in the impugned circular dated 16th March,
2026 whereby all the District Mineral Officers of Kashmir Province
have been directed not to issue any Permission of Customary
Mining under S.O 599 of 2022 till further orders from the
competent authority.
02. It has been vehemently argued by Mr. Aswad R. Attar,
learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned circular is in
utter violation of the Mines and Minerals (Development and
Regulation) Act, 1957 and the Jammu & Kashmir Minor Mineral
Concession, Storage, Transportation of Minerals and Prevention of
Illegal Mining Rules, 2016, for the reason that the respondents
while issuing the impugned circular have failed to take into
consideration that the activity of extraction and disposal of sand,
silt and clay from riverbed is an activity which is permitted in law,
being undertaken strictly in accordance with provisions of the
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and
the rules made thereunder.
03. It is the specific case of the petitioners that they have
been continuously allowed to undertake the activity without any
hindrance from the respondent authorities and, therefore,
according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the impugned
circular cannot withstand the scrutiny of law and is liable to be
quashed.
04. In addition, it has also been specifically pleaded though
not argued that the impugned circular has predicated on the
assumption that the National Green Tribunal being seized of the
issue with respect to the illegal sand mining, would, therefore, also
bring within its ambit the activity being carried out by the
petitioners by ignoring the fact that the extraction and disposal
activity so undertaken by the petitioners is a customary practice,
which is being done strictly in accordance with the provisions of
the aforesaid Act and the rules made thereunder. Thus, the
impugned action of the respondents according to the learned
counsel for the petitioners manifested in the impugned Circular is
bereft of any logical reasoning and has been issued without due
application of mind, and, as such, cannot sustain the test of law
and liable to be quashed.
05. The learned counsel for the petitioners has laid much
emphasis on the principle of law that once an activity or action is
permitted in law and has a statutory flavor, the same cannot be
stopped without the authority of law and any such interference
would be contrary to the mandate of law as well as the rules
framed thereunder. Thus, the impugned circular according to the
learned counsel for the petitioners has ostensibly been passed in
the backdrop of the orders passed by the National Green Tribunal
and cannot be said to be in consonance with law in force and, as
such, liable to be quashed.
06. With a view to fortify his claim the learned counsel for
the petitioners has drawn a distinction between the illegal sand
mafia operations and the manual customary mining practiced by
the Petitioners strictly in consonance with law. Thus, as per the
learned counsel, the respondents by treating these two distinct
classes as one, have not only violated the doctrine of reasonable
classification with object sought to be achieved but the issuance of
the impugned circular tentamounts to acting in derogation of
mandate and spirit of law and also to the principles enshrined in
Article 14 of the Constitution.
07. Lastly, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that manual extraction of sand and silt is the sole source of income
for the destitute petitioners and their forefathers and the blanket
ban imposed by the respondents through the medium of the
impugned circular, in derogation to the spirit and mandate of law,
without providing an opportunity of being heard, not only
deprives the petitioners of their livelihood as mandated under
Article 21 of the Constitution but the same is also not sustainable
in the yes of law.
08. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s) at length and
perused the material on record.
09. Prima facie a case for indulgence is made out.
10. Issue notice to the respondent(s) in the main petition as
well as in the connected CM, returnable within a period of four
weeks.
11. Requisites for service within one week.
12. List on 30th May, 2026.
13. In the meantime, subject to objections from the other side
and till the next date of hearing before the Bench, there be will stay
of the operation of the impugned circular bearing No.
MSK/DGM/ SGR/F-10-II/10379-10390 dated 16th March, 2026,
which restrains the District Mineral Officer to issue the Permission
of Customary Mining under S.O 599 of 2022, a permissible activity
inconsonance with rules in vogue, to the extent of petitioners.
14. Modification, Vacation, Alteration on motion.
(Wasim Sadiq Nargal)
Judge
SRINAGAR:
18.04.2026
“HAMID”
Abdul Hamid Bhat
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
20.04.2026
