The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has stayed an interim order that mandated the creation of an ad-hoc committee to oversee the educational management of the Siraj-ul-Uloom Welfare Foundation in Shopian. The directive, originally issued by the Principal District Judge of Shopian, followed the declaration of the foundation as an unlawful entity under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. While the High Court has paused the implementation of the lower court’s order, it has explicitly issued a protective mandate to ensure that the ongoing studies and future education of the students currently enrolled at the institution remain shielded from administrative disruption.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani issued the stay order on November 2, 2026, in response to a petition filed by the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir. The government had challenged the trial court’s decision to place the foundation under the supervision and control of a provisional liquidator appointed by the National Company Law Tribunal. Under the terms of the High Court’s stay, the status quo is maintained until the next date of hearing, scheduled for February 1, 2027, provided that the respondents file their objections within the four-week period granted by the bench.

Judicial Mandate on Student Welfare

Recognizing the potential for academic instability, the High Court emphasized that the legal proceedings concerning the foundation’s status must not come at the expense of the students. The bench clarified the scope of its intervention, stating, “the students, if any, studying in the school run by the respondent-company on the date of issuance of the order impugned shall not be disturbed.” Furthermore, the Court explicitly commanded the petitioners to guarantee that the educational journey of these students is not hampered by the legal contest. The bench reinforced this by directing that the “students' ongoing studies and future education are not adversely affected in any manner.”

Procedural History and Statutory Context

The legal friction stems from an earlier administrative determination by the Divisional Commissioner of Kashmir, who declared the Darul Uloom Jamiat Siraj-ul-Uloom, situated in Imam Sahib, Shopian, as an unlawful place under Section 8(1) of the UAPA. This administrative action was rooted in a dossier prepared by the Senior Superintendent of Police in Shopian, which flagged the institution for its alleged activities.

Following this declaration, the Foundation had moved an interim application before the Principal District Judge of Shopian, invoking provisions of Section 8(8) of the UAPA. This section allows for certain judicial oversight when an institution or property is designated as unlawful. The trial court subsequently ordered the formation of an ad-hoc committee, tasking it with the preservation and management of the school, subject to the oversight of the NCLT-appointed liquidator. The Union Territory government, dissatisfied with this arrangement, moved the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, arguing that such a committee interfered with the statutory processes governing unlawful associations under the UAPA.

Path Toward Final Adjudication

While the High Court’s current order halts the immediate implementation of the trial court’s ad-hoc management plan, it has not stalled the broader legal inquiry. The Division Bench underscored the necessity for a definitive resolution on the merits of the case. In its concluding directions, the Court stated, “We further clarify that the Trial Court shall proceed with the determination of the issues raised and dispose of the main petition on merits.”

As the matter stands, the case will return for further deliberation in February. Until that time, the stay remains in effect, serving as a legal bridge that ensures the educational institution’s current operations continue while the competing claims regarding its status and management are adjudicated under the appropriate statutory framework. The focus of the litigation now shifts back to the trial court, where the fundamental questions regarding the management of the foundation under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act will be settled, provided that the ongoing student instruction remains undisturbed throughout the process.