Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Through: Mr. P.S Ahmad vs Union Territory Of Ladakh And on 19 June, 2025
Serial No. 17
Supplementary Cause list
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 1415/2025
CM (3687/2025)
...Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
MOHAMMAD RAFIQ PUJWALA AND ORS
(LADAKH CASE)
Through: Mr. P.S Ahmad, Advocate
Vs.
UNION TERRITORY OF LADAKH AND ...Respondent(s)
ORS (ANIMAL AND SHEEP
HUSBANDRY/LAHDC)
Through: Mr. T.M. Shamsi, DSGI with
Ms. Shugufta Maqbool, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE.
ORDER
19.06.2025
1. Heard.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners Mr. P.S Ahmad, Advocate in response
to the queries raised by the court submitted that he deletes the respondent No. 1
from the list of respondents and also withdraws from the para “a” of the prayer
clause.
3. Registry is directed to update the title sheet of the case by renumbering
the respondents and to also make the necessary entry of deletion against para “a”
of the relief clause.
4. Mr. T.M. Shamsi, learned DSGI appeared and accepted notice on behalf
of the respondents 1,3,4, 6-9.
5. Notice returnable by the next date of hearing, subject to taking of steps
for service within a period of two weeks shall go to the other respondents for
filing of reply/objections.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants/petitioners in respect of his
prayer for grant of interim relief, who inter-alia submitted that the petitioners are
the domiciles of UT of Jammu and Kashmir and citizens of India hailing from
Bakerwal community – a traditional nomadic pastoral community recognized as
Scheduled Tribe who have been practicing seasonal migration with their
livestock through established routes from their generations in connection with
their livelihood while maintaining the balance between their legal rights and the
protection of environment. That their ancestors up to them as their descendents
have been traditionally using the grazing grounds in Kargil during summer for
the survival of their livestock, in connection whereof they have been paying
regular taxes to the Forest Division Kathua. The learned counsel further
submitted that a dispute arose in 1989 between the inhabitants of Rangdum
village District Kargil and the petitioners on the issue of use of grazing pastures
during summer by the petitioners, leading to multiple litigations. That the
litigations filed by the inhabitants of the Rangdum village against the
predecessors of the petitioners/petitioners suffered dismissal right from the court
of Sub-judge Kargil up to this Court as is evidenced from the perusal of the
orders dated 26.06.2013, 29.10.2014, 24.10.2024/04.03.2010 respectively passed
by the court of Sub-judge Kargil, Court of Principal District Judge Kargil and
this Court. It was further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners
that it has been the practice and tradition among the Bakerwal tribes since times
immoral to shift to different hotter/cooler places/pastures as seasonal changes
within the UTs of Jammu and Kashmir/Ladakh or even to the places/pastures
within the neighbouring states in connection with the grazing of their livestock.
The learned counsel submitted that the UT of Ladakh was constituting a part of
the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir. He further submitted that the
migration of the petitioners for the purpose of their livestock/cattle being their
only source of income, subject to reasonable restrictions is their fundamental
right guaranteed under Part III of our Constitution. He submitted that the
petitioners are being unnecessarily prohibited/restrained from taking their
cattle/livestock to the pastures within the territory of Ladakh which is highly
against their constitutional and other legal rights as they have been put to great
hardship and are incurring an irreparable loss. The learned counsel submitted
that the petitioners are ever ready to abide by any conditions/regulations to be
imposed by the Governments of J&K and Ladakh.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that repeated
representations were made by the petitioners to the administration of the UT of
Ladakh for allowing them to take their livestock/cattle to the pastures as per the
decades old practice and tradition of their forefathers but no one is listening to
their genuine demands.
8. Per contra, the learned DSGI, Mr. T.M. Shamsi submitted that petitioners
have no cause of action to file the instant writ petition to challenge an integral
administrative order of the UT of Ladakh. He contended that none of the rights
of the petitioners stand infringed as the opinion of the Government of Ladakh to
restrain the pastoral activities are in the interest of the environmental
preservation. He submitted that respondents will file a detailed reply to the
petition to demonstrate that the petitioners have no cause of action.
9. Perused the interim application supported with an affidavit. Also perused
the main petition and the copies of documents enclosed with the same as
annexures thereto.
10. Considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel
appearing for the parties.
11. List on 21.07.2025.
12. In the mean time, subject to any vacation or modification upon the
consideration of objections/arguments and till further orders, the respondents are
directed to accord a favorable addressal to the case of the petitioners at an
earliest and submit a status report to the Court.
(MOHD YOUSUF WANI)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR:
19.06.2025
Adil Ismail