DR.SUBY SINGH D/O DR. JASBIR SINGH ABHINAV SHARMA vs STATE OF J AND K THROUGH COMMISSIONER/SECRETARY — SWP/1167/2017

Disposed: Contested--Dismissed for Non Prosecution on 24th April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 16-May-2017

CNR: JKHC020048892017

Filing Number

SWP/7727/2017

Filing Date

15-May-2017

Registration No

SWP/1167/2017

Registration Date

15-May-2017

Judge

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma

Coram

Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SB SERVICE WRIT PETITIONS ( 100 )

Sub-Category

MATTERS PERTAINING TO STATE GOVT. ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

SERVICE WRIT PETITION (SWP)

Decision Date

24-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed for Non Prosecution

Last updated 27-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DR.SUBY SINGH D/O DR. JASBIR SINGH ABHINAV SHARMA

  2. 2.DR AKHTAR-UN-NISA SALARIA D/O S A SALARIA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF J AND K THROUGH COMMISSIONER/SECRETARY

  2. 2.PRINCIPAL

  3. 3.DIRECTOR FINANCE J AND K GOVT.,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu SharmaView PDF

    The petition filed by Dr. Suby Singh seeking to quash a communication (No. HME/Acctts./98/2014 dated 29.10.2014) from the State of J&K was dismissed for non-prosecution. The court found that the petitioner's counsel had no instructions to proceed and the petitioner appeared uninterested in pursuing the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Apr-2026

    For Admission After Notice

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma

  4. 17-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu SharmaView PDF

  5. 17-Apr-2026

    For Admission After Notice

  6. 16-May-2017

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 15-May-2017

    Case filed

    Registration No. SWP/1167/2017

casestatus.in Summary

The petition filed by Dr. Suby Singh seeking to quash a communication (No. HME/Acctts./98/2014 dated 29.10.2014) from the State of J&K was dismissed for non-prosecution. The court found that the petitioner's counsel had no instructions to proceed and the petitioner appeared uninterested in pursuing the matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case