RAM KRISHAN AND ORS. v. VINOD GUPTA EXE.ENGINEER P.H.E.
CPSW/25/2017 · 2026-05-04
Writ Petition (Civil)body2017
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2017 DAILYLAW 1300 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2017 DAILYLAW 1300 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CJ Court Case: CPSW No. 25/2017 in SWP No. 307/2016
Ram Krishan and others ….. Appellant/Petitioner(s)
Through: None Vs
Vinod Gupta , Exe. Engineer, PHE. .…. Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Sagira Jaffar, Assisting counsel to Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
Coram:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
ORDER 04.05.2026
Learned counsel for the respondent, at the outset, has drawn the attention of the Court to the Statement of facts/compliance report filed on behalf of the respondent. She submits that the petitioners figuring at Serial Nos. 14-16 and 20 were granted benefits of the Order No. PHEU/2512-18 dated July 07,
2016. Whereas petitioner at Serial No. 09 (SWP No. 307/2016) is not even working with the answering respondent. Further, petitioners who figure at Serial No. 10-13 & 17-19 were regularized with effect from April 01, 1996 and were not entitled to the benefits of circular No. PHEJ/20094-20013 dated March 18, 1993 as per the instructions received from the Office of respondent Nos. 2 vide letter No. PHEJ/Legal/199/2016/Udhampur/3846 dated June 10, 2016 and letter No: PHEJ/Legal/199/2016/Udhampur/4919 dated June 27, 2016, which clearly indicates that the benefits should be accorded to those petitioners only who were regularized prior to April 01, 1996.
The matter is pending since 2017 and nearly a decade has gone by. None is present either on behalf of the petitioners to clarify if anything actually survives in the petition.
That being so, nothing substantive survives in the petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed for non-prosecution.
( (ARUN PALLI) CHIEF JUSTICE Jammu 04.05.2026 Suraj K. Singh
Sr.No. 43
2
WP(C) No. 322/2025