Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Meenu vs State Of J&K & Anr on 24 March, 2026
Author: Sanjay Dhar
Bench: Sanjay Dhar
Regular List
Sr. No. 23
2026:JKLHC-JMU:840
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
SWP No. 2055/2012
Meenu .....Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. H. C. Jalmeria, Advocate.
Vs
State of J&K & Anr. ..... Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER
24.03.2026
01. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition, has sought a direction upon the respondents to release her wages w.e.f. September, 2011.
02. As per case of the petitioner, she was engaged as Anganwari Helper in Anganwadi Centre, Surara (Mohalla Mool Raj) in the ICDS Project Ghagwal, District Samba in terms of engagement order dated 05.09.2011. According to the petitioner, she has been regularly performing her duties in the aforesaid Anganwadi Centre since the date of her engagement.
03. It has been submitted that vide communication dated 03.12.2021, the petitioner was asked to explain her position in view of the directions issued by this Court in SWP No. 2330/2011 whereafter, the petitioner explained her position to respondent No. 2, submitting the requisite documents but despite tendering 2026:JKLHC-JMU:840 2 SWP No. 2055/2012 her explanation, respondent No. 2 has not released her wages.
04. The official respondents have filed their reply to the writ petition in which it has been submitted that due to pendency of SWP No. 2330/2011 filed by one Trishla Devi in which the writ petitioner had been impleaded as private respondent, the honorarium in favour of the petitioner could not be released. It has been submitted that upon disposal of the said writ petition, vide order dated 21.11.2011, the claim of Trishla Devi was considered by the respondents and vide order dated 15.05.2012, the same was rejected. It has been further submitted that process to pay the honorarium of the petitioner was undertaken by the official respondents but in the meanwhile she has approached this Court. It has also been submitted that the respondents are ready to pay honorarium to the petitioner.
05. Heard and considered.
06. Having regard to the submissions made by the respondents in their reply with regard to the entitlement of the petitioner to honorarium and keeping in view of the fact that the claim projected by Trishla Devi stands rejected by the respondents, there is no impediment in allowing the prayer of the petitioner.
07. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to release the legitimately earned honorarium of the 2026:JKLHC-JMU:840 3 SWP No. 2055/2012 petitioner for the period for which she has worked with the respondents forthwith. The respondents shall continue to release the honorarium in her favour till such time, her engagement subsists.
08. Disposed of.
(SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE Jammu 24.03.2026 Shivalee