Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2020 DAILYLAW 782 (JK)

BASHARAT HUSSAIN v. SARITA CHOUHAN SECY EDUCATION DEPTT AND ANR

CCP(S)/40/2020 · 2026-05-15

body2020

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Sr. No. 52 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU (THROUGH VIRTUAL MODE) CCP(S)/40/2020 BASHARAT HUSSAIN …Petitioner(s)/appellant(s) Through: None Vs. SARITA CHOUHAN SECY EDUCATION DEPTT AND ANR ...Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Saliqa Sheikh, Assisting Counsel vice Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE O R D E R 15-05-2026 Vide this petition, the petitioner seeks initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for not implementing the judgment dated 11th March, 2019 rendered in SWP no.414/2019 (Basharat Hussain versus State and others). A bare reading of the order reveals that the petition preferred by the petitioner was disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider his claim as set out in the representation that was alleged pending and to take appropriate decision. Further, in the event, the provisions of SRO 520 dated 21st December, 2017, were attracted in the instant case the same be also taken note of. Statement of facts on behalf of respondents has been filed. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents has drawn attention of the court to the speaking order dated 01.10.2020 appended as Annexure-I to the response/objections. She submits that in fact the authorities have made every possible endeavor to comply with the order dated March 11, 2019, inasmuch as the petitioner was called many times by the competent authority to produce the relevant records to initiate process and consider his claim. But neither the petitioner communicated with the Shameem Hamid Mir 2026.04.16 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document department nor produced the relevant records. Thus, in the circumstances, respondents could not be accused of having violated the directions issued by this Court. The petition is pending since 2019 and, seven years have gone by. None is present either on behalf of the petitioners to pursue the petition. That being so, the Court is choice less but to dismiss the petition for non- prosecution. (ARUN PALLI) CHIEF JUSTICE SRINAGAR 15-05-2026 Shameem H. Shameem Hamid Mir 2026.04.16 10:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document