M/S A.S.MULTISERVICES TH.ITS PROP SHEIKH MUSHTAQ vs AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA TH.ITS CHAIRMAN AND OTHERS — WP(C)/1025/2026

Case under Article 226-Section103 Section 226. Next hearing: 08th May 2026.

Next hearing 08-May-2026

CNR: JKHC010021002026

Filing Number

WP(C)/1598/2026

Filing Date

06-May-2026

Registration No

WP(C)/1025/2026

Registration Date

06-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.A. Chowdhary

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.A. Chowdhary

Bench Type

SINGLE BENCH

Category

SB OTHER WRIT PETITIONS ( 101 )

Sub-Category

LEASE AND GOVT. CONTRACTS ( 14 )

Judicial Branch

OTHER WRIT PETITION (OWP)

Last updated 08-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Article 226-Section103 Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S A.S.MULTISERVICES TH.ITS PROP SHEIKH MUSHTAQ

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA TH.ITS CHAIRMAN AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. 08-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 08-May-2026

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.A. ChowdharyView PDF

    Case Summary: WP(C) 1025/2026 M/s A.S. Multiservices challenged the Airport Authority of India's demand for Rs. 60,24,242/- and a Rs. 6.14 lakh penalty imposed on their vehicle parking contract at Srinagar Airport, claiming force majeure protection due to Operation Sindoor disruptions. The High Court dismissed the petition as not maintainable, holding that the petitioner must first pursue the contractual dispute resolution mechanism (Mediation/Arbitration under Clause 28) rather than writ jurisdiction, while restraining bank guarantee encashment for two weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-May-2026

    For Admission Fresh

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.A. Chowdhary

  4. 06-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/1025/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP(C) 1025/2026 M/s A.S. Multiservices challenged the Airport Authority of India's demand for Rs. 60,24,242/- and a Rs. 6.14 lakh penalty imposed on their vehicle parking contract at Srinagar Airport, claiming force majeure protection due to Operation Sindoor disruptions. The High Court dismissed the petition as not maintainable, holding that the petitioner must first pursue the contractual dispute resolution mechanism (Mediation/Arbitration under Clause 28) rather than writ jurisdiction, while restraining bank guarantee encashment for two weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case