IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

Ram Paul Sharma, aged 61 years,

S/o Late Sh. Dina Nath Sharma,

R/o 109/5, Channi Himmat Housing Colony,

Jammu.

…..Petitioner

Through: Mr. P. N. Raina, Sr. Advocate with

Mr. J. A. Hamal, Advocate

Vs

1. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir

Through its Principal Secretary to Government,

Housing & Urban Development Department,

Civil Secretariat, Jammu.

2. Managing Director, J&K Housing Board,

A/D Block Green Belt Park,

Gandhi Nagar, Jammu.

3. Director Finance, J&K Housing Board,

A/D Block Green Belt Park,

Gandhi Nagar, Jammu.

4. Collector, J&K Housing Board,

A/D Block Green Belt Park,

Gandhi Nagar, Jammu.

.….Respondent

s

Through: Mr. S. S. Nanda, Sr. AAG

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

29.12.2025

01. Heard Mr. P. N. Raina, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. J. A. Hamal, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. S. S.

Nanda, learned Sr. AAG for the respondents.

02. Legality and validity of an Order No. 338 JKHB of 2021 dated 15.12.2021 passed by the respondent No. 2 – Managing Director, Jammu & Kashmir Housing Board (in short “MD JKHB”) insofar as it has directed initiation of recovery proceedings for an amount of Rs. 26.8924 crores (excluding Rs. 70.76 lacs) from the petitioner, along with one Aftab Pandit and Kulbhushan Kumar, all three being ex- officials of JKHB, is being seriously challenged by the petitioner through the medium of present writ petition invoking article 226 of the Constitution of India.

03. The petitioner was holding the post of Secretary JKHB before he came to be appointed as I/c Managing Director JKHB by virtue of Govt. Order No. 1266-GAD of

2013 dated 04.09.2013

04. During his authority as MD JKHB, the petitioner is said to have directed execution of the works for upgradation/upkeep of civic facilities, construction of community halls in the areas which were said to be falling outside the limits of the Housing Colonies developed and maintained by JKHB and for which works there was no budgetary provision. The execution of those works is also said to have been carried out without following requisite codal formalities being in breach of rules and instructions as detailed in Jammu & Kashmir Financial Code, Chapter-

IX

05. The works executed involved total expenditure of Rs.27.60 crores out of which Rs.21.76 crores were met out by JKHB from its own funds whereas for the rest of the funds requisition was made from the Govt.

06. Along with the petitioner, two other officials of JKHB were held to be answerable and accountable for carrying out the execution of the works in the areas beyond the jurisdiction of JKHB and also without budgetary provisions for the same and said two officials were Kulbhushan Kumar, then serving as FA/CAO, JKHB and Aftab Rashid Pandit, then posted as DGM, JKHB.

07. Alleging misconduct on the part of said three JKHB officials, an internal enquiry was ordered by virtue of Govt. Order No. 178-HUDD of 2015 dated 14.07.2015 with respect to the works so executed by JKHB.

08. Ordered enquiry was to be conducted by a three member committee comprised of MD JKHB, Additional Secretary, H&UDD and Joint Director, Plg. H&UDD, which committee eventually came forward with findings on five points. Report to said effect is said to have been submitted vide No. HUD/HQ/113/2016 dated 22.09.2016

09. Vide a Govt. Order No. 142-HUDD of 2017 dated 15.06.2017, a regular departmental enquiry came to be ordered against the petitioner and said two JKHB officials.

10. In the meantime, an aggrieved contractor, namely, Sanjeev Kumar, who had carried out execution of some of contract works but having not been paid his claims, had approached this Court with a writ petition OWP No. 123/2018 seeking a writ of mandamus for release of so called admitted liability of an amount of Rs. 115.14 lacs

11. In the departmental enquiry so ordered against the petitioner and two other officials in terms of Govt. Order No. 142-HUDD of 2017 dated 15.06.2017, the Enquiry Officer – Mr. M. Raju, IAS came forwa