Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Naveed Bukhtiyar vs Deputy Commissioner Baramulla And Ors on 14 March, 2025
Author: Javed Iqbal Wani
Bench: Javed Iqbal Wani
S. No.38
Reg.. list
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 2755/2022
CM(6965/2022)
NAVEED BUKHTIYAR ...Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through: Mr. Aswad Attar, Advocate
Vs.
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BARAMULLA AND ORS. ...Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Bikdramdeep Singh, Dy AG with
Ms. Naubahar Khan, AC
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE
ORDER
14.03.2025
1. The petitioner in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the following reliefs:-
(i) Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the impugned order bearing No. 716/Nto/2021 dated 23.11.2021, impugned order rejection bearing No. The/Uri/OQ/21/1073-75 dated 25.11.2021 and impugned order bearing No. DCB/APP/2022/778-80 dated 09.04.2022 passed by respondent No. 3,2 and 1 respectively as illegal and non-est in law, be issued in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
(ii) Writ in the nature of certiorari quashing/setting-aside the impugned order bearing No. DB/APP/2022/778-80 dated 09.04.2022, impugned order of rejection bearing No. Teh/Uri/OQ/21/1073-75 dated 25.11.2021 and impugned order bearing No. DCB/APP/2022/778-80 dated 09.04.2022 passed by respondent No. 3,2 and 1 be issued in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
2. The facts under the cover of which the aforesaid reliefs have been prayed and are stated in the petition, are that the petitioner claims to be an Ethnic Phari, having Phari Language as his mother tongue, as such, entitling him to a certificate thereof.
3. It is being stated that the petitioner in this regard applied to Lambardar for verifying his status as Phari speaking, who referred the same to respondent 2 for issuance of a formal certificate, however, the petitioner in the meantime came to know about the registration of an FIR against him qua the verification report made by the Lambardar, wherein it had been alleged that the petitioner had fabricated the verification report of the Lambardar, which FIR culminated into charge sheet and the petitioner herein is facing trial in the said case.
4. It is being next stated that the Tehsildar respondent 2 herein, however, without verifying the entitlement of the petitioner for issuance of Phari speaking certificate merely on the basis of the allegations that the petitioner fabricated the verification report/certificate of the Lambardar reflected the same in terms of order dated 25.11.2021 which came to be challenged by the petitioner in an appeal before respondent 1, which appeal came to be dismissed by respondent 1 on 09.04.2022.
5. The short grievance projected by the petitioner in the instant petition is that the respondents instead of considering the claim of the petitioner for issuance of Phari Speaking certificate in its right and correct perspective have rejected the claim of the petitioner for issuance of the said certificate merely on account of the allegations that the petitioner fabricated the verification report of the Lambardar.
6. Objections to the petition have been filed by the respondents, wherein it is being admitted that the petitioner was found to have got indulged in fabrication of the verification report/certificate of the Lambardar and consequently an FIR in this regard came to be registered against the petitioner which is pending trial.
It is being further stated that the petitioner's case was considered and he was found not qualifying for issuance of the certificate as per the guidelines issued by the Government in SO 127 dated 20.04.2020. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. Perusal of the record available in general and impugned orders passed by the respondents in particular would tend to show that the respondents seemingly have admittedly not considered the case of the petitioner in its true and correct perspective, in that, even the impugned communication dated 23.11.2021 addressed by the Naib Tehsildar Uri to Tehsildar Uri reveals that there had been contradictory reports of the Chowkidar and Lambardar qua the status of the petitioner, thus, in view of said contradictory reports, the respondents could not have proceeded to reject the claim of the petitioner for issuance of the certificate in question before conducting a full dressed inquiry therein in the matter and associating the petitioner as well therein the said inquiry.
8. Under these circumstances, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the instant petition at this stage with the consent of the counsel for the parties with a direction to the respondents to re-visit and re-consider the case of the petitioner, un-influenced by the pendency of the criminal case against the petitioner, for issuance of Phari Speaking certificate strictly in accordance with applicable law and rules.
9. Let the aforesaid exercise be undertaken and concluded by the respondents within eight weeks from the date a copy of this order is produced by the petitioner before Tehsildar-respondent 2.
10. In view of above, the impugned communication/orders shall be deemed to have been set aside.
11.Disposed of.
(JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 14.03.2025 "S.Nuzhat"