The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has dismissed a fresh writ petition filed by Shanaza Banoo seeking permission to resume duties as an Aaya at a government primary school in Doda district. Justice Sanjay Dhar held that the petitioner could not seek the same relief through another writ petition when an earlier court direction already addressed her claim.
Background
The dispute arose from the selection process for Helpers/Aaya under the Early Childhood Care and Education scheme for 2024–25. Banoo challenged the selection of another candidate, alleging that she did not satisfy the Below Poverty Line eligibility requirement. She also alleged that documents submitted by the selected candidate were fabricated.
Following a representation and an inquiry, the other candidate’s engagement was cancelled, and Banoo was engaged through an order dated June 30, 2025. However, a dispute over resuming duties followed after the other candidate approached the Central Administrative Tribunal.
Banoo subsequently filed an earlier writ petition, WP(C) No. 1335/2026. On May 15, 2026, the High Court directed the concerned authority to issue a reasoned written order determining the status of her selection and engagement after hearing both candidates. Alleging non-compliance, she initiated contempt proceedings, which remained pending.
Justice Sanjay Dhar noted that the present petition sought substantially the same relief covered by the earlier proceedings. The Court observed that the earlier direction had already required the authorities to consider Banoo’s engagement and determine its status.
The Court stated,
“Once a direction has been passed by a competent court upon the official respondents consider her claim to the engagement as Aaya in terms of engagement order dated 30.06.2025, there is no need to pass another similar direction by way of a fresh order.”
It further observed that filing another writ petition instead of pursuing the pending contempt proceedings would result in multiple proceedings concerning the same cause of action.
Holding that entertaining the fresh petition would amount to impermissible multiplicity of proceedings, the High Court dismissed WP(C) No. 3380/2026.
However, it left Banoo free to pursue the pending contempt proceedings against the official respondents.
Case Details
Case Title: Shanaza Banoo v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and Others
Case Number: WP(C) No. 3380/2026
Judge: Justice Sanjay Dhar
Decision Date: October 23, 2026
