SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(J&K) 1685

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
UT OF J AND K TH CHIEF SECRETARY JAMMU AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
GULSHAN ARA AND ANOTHER – Respondent
LPA 57 / 2025



##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

Reserved on: 16.12.2025

Pronounced on 24.12.2025

Uploaded on 24.12.2025

Whether the operative part or full judgment

is pronounced: Full Judgment

CJ Court:

Case: LPA No. 57/2025 in

OWP No. 772/2004

CM Nos. 1792-1793/2025

1. State (now U.T.) of J&K through Chief …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)

Secretary to Govt. Civil Secretariat,

J&K Jammu/Srinagar.

2. Chief Engineer, Power Development

Department (EM& RE), Jammu.

3. Divisional Engineer, Electricity

Department, Prade Ground, Jammu.

4. Director General of Police, J&K,

Jammu.

Through: Mr. Raman Sharma, Sr. Advocate (AAG) with

Ms. Jagmeet Kour, Assisting Counsel.

v/s

…. Respondent(s)

1. Gulshan Ara Age 22 years Wd/o

Late Sh. Liaqat Ali.

2. Kashif Ali, age 03 years S/o Late Sh.

Liaqat Ali (Minor through the

natural Guardian)

–both residents of Choudhary

(Rehtal), Tehsil and District Rajouri.

Through:

##PAGE2##

2

LPA No. 57/2025

CORAM: HON‟BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON‟BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE.

JUDGMENT

-

‘OSWAL J’

CM NO. 1792/2025

1. This is an application seeking condonation of 201 days‟ delay in filing the

accompanying appeal.

2. For the reasons stated in the application, coupled with the submissions

made at bar, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the delay in filing

the appeal is condoned.

3. Application is disposed of.

4. Main appeal is taken up on board.

LPA No. 57/2025

5. The instant intra-court appeal is directed against the judgment dated

02.04.2024 passed by the learned Writ Court in OWP No. 772/2004,

titled, „Gulshan Ara and Anr. vs. State of J&K and Ors’, whereby the

learned Writ Court has held the respondents entitled to compensation to

the tune of Rs. 16,53,652/- alongwith simple interest @ 6% per annum

from the date of filing of the writ petition until its recovery and fastened

the liability of payment on the appellants.

6. The appellants have challenged the judgment dated 02.04.2024 primarily

on the ground that the writ petition involved disputed questions of fact.

They contend that these issues require adjudication by a Civil Court and

fall beyond the proper scope of writ jurisdiction. It is further contended

that, pursuant to Government Order No. 723-GR (GAD) of 1990 dated

##PAGE3##

3

LPA No. 57/2025

10.07.1090, the respondents were entitled only to ex-gratia relief for the

amount of Rs. 5.00 lacs, as the deceased was a member of the police

force. The appellants maintain that there being no negligence on the part

of the officials of the Power Development Department in relation to the

electrocution of the deceased, they cannot be held responsible for the

occurrence, and that the liability for payment of the said amount was

improperly fastened upon them.

7. Mr. Raman Sharma, learned AAG, submitted that the learned Writ Court

ought to have relegated the respondents to the Civil Court for redressal of

their grievance as they had sought compensation in a writ petition

involving disputed questions of fact. It is further submitted that in terms

of Government order dated 10.07.1990, the respondents were entitled only

to ex-gratia relief to the extent of Rs. 5.00 lacs.

8. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record.

9. The record depicts that the respondents had filed the writ petition for

commanding the appellants to pay compensation of Rs. 25.35 lacs

alongwith interest @ 12% per annum on account of the demise of Liaqat

Ali, who was the husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondent

No. 2. The incident took place near TCP Nagrota at about 5:00 a.m. on

03.12.2003, when the deceased, Liaqat Ali, came into contact with a live

electric wire that had fallen to the ground. Liaqat Ali was serving as a

Selection Grade Constable with Traffic Police and posted on the National

Highway. The case projected by the respondents was that, while Liaqat

Ali had gone to attend the call of nature, he came into contact with a live

##PAGE4##

4

LPA No. 57/2025

electric wire lying on a public way, as a result whereof, he suffered

serious burn injuries. He was immediately rushed to the Go

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top