CCP(S) No. 91/2021 Page 1 of 4 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Pronounced on : 17.02.2026 Uploaded on : 19.02.2026 CCP(S) No. 91/2021 Arfana Kouser …..Petitioner Through: Mr. Faiza Ul Arif, Advocate Vs Khalid Jahangir, Chairman, J&K Services Selection Board, Jammu .….Respondents Through: Ms. Saliqa Sheikh, Assisting Counsel to Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER 01. The petitioner is seeking implementation of order dated 04.03.2020 passed by the writ Court whereby writ petition WP(C) No. 729/2020 has been disposed of in terms of the stand taken by the respondents. 02. It is pertinent to mention here that learned counsel for the respondents had made a submission before the writ Court that certain clarifications were required from the Planning Department and the same have been received. It was also submitted by the counsel for the respondents Serial No. 68 Regular List CCP(S) No. 91/2021 Page 2 of 4 that now the selection process shall be concluded within three months. 03. As per the status report/statement of facts filed by the respondents, in the 194th meeting of the Board held on 17.12.2021 selection list was prepared but the same could not be forwarded to the Indenting Department as in the meantime, the General Administration Department vide communication dated 30.01.2022 directed the Board not to release any further recommendations/selection lists in respect of posts referred prior to the enactment of the Jammu and Kashmir Re-organization Act, 2019. It has been submitted that in pursuance to the directions of the General Administration Department, the Board withdrew all the posts for which the selection had not been finalized. 04. As is clear from the direction of the writ Court, the respondents in view of the statement made by their counsel, were asked to complete the selection process within a period of three months w.e.f. the said order i.e. w.e.f. 04.03.2020. It seems that when the respondent- Board decided to conclude the selection process and made recommendations, instructions came from the CCP(S) No. 91/2021 Page 3 of 4 General Administration Department that all posts for which the selection process have not been finalized shall be deemed to have been withdrawn with immediate effect. In view of these directions of the General Administration Department, the respondents could not finalize the selection process. 05. The question arises as to whether in the aforesaid circumstances there has been any willful default on the part of the respondents in implementing the order of the writ Court. 06. The aforesaid question came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ishfaq Tantray Vs. Khalid Jahangir, Chairman JKSSB in CCP(D) No. 8/2022 decided on 21.07.2023. The Division Bench held that a selected candidate does not have an indefeasible right to be appointed and since a policy decision has been taken by the Administration at the higher level before such a right had accrued in favour of the selected candidates for getting appointed, the same would not amount to commission of contempt of the Court as it cannot be said to be willful disobedience of the order. CCP(S) No. 91/2021 Page 4 of 4 07. Applying the said ratio to the present case, it cannot be stated that the respondents have committed willful disobedience of the order of the writ Court by not finalizing the selection. In the face of the policy decision of the Government to withdraw all posts for which selection had not been finalized, the respondents could not take follow up action. Therefore, there is no willful default on their part. 08. In view of the above, the contempt proceedings are closed and the contempt petition is disposed of, accordingly. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU 17.02.2026 SUNIL Whether the order is speaking ? : Yes Whether the order is reportable ? : No