Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2021 DAILYLAW 775 (JK)

ABDUL AHAD SOFI v. MANDEEP KOUR AND ORS. (RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT) (SWP/1397/2007)

CCP(S)/467/2021 · 2026-04-24

Sanjay Dhar

body2021

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Serial No. 28 Regular Cause List. HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(S) 467/2021 in[SWP 1397/2007]. ABDUL AHAD SOFI. …Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Areeb Kawoosa, Adv. VERSUS MANDEEP KOUR AND ORS. Through: Mr. Alla-ud-Din Ganai, AAG. …Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE. ORDER 24-04-2026 Vide order passed by the writ court on 09-07-2018, the respondents were directed to consider the claim of petitioner for regularization within a period of three months from the date such representation is submitted by the petitioner. Fresh compliance report has been filed by the respondents, which has been produced in the Court today. The same is taken on record. As per the fresh compliance report, the respondents have issued Government Order No. 112-JK (RD&PR) of 2026 dated 15-04-2026, whereby, after considering the claim of the petitioner, his services have been regularized as helper in the Pay Scale 750-940 (pre-revised) with effect from 01-10-1996 on notional basis in terms of Government Order No. 355 of 1996 dated 30-04-1996. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents were duty-bound to accord monetary effect to the regularization of the petitioner with effect from the date they have regularized his services, but in the instant case, they have only given notional effect to the same. As per directions of the writ court, only consideration was required to be accorded by respondents to the claim of petitioner for regularization, which they have done, and while doing so, they have given notional effect to the regularization of services of the petitioner. If the petitioner has any grievance about the same, he is at liberty to take resort to appropriate remedy, but once the respondents have accorded consideration to the claim of petitioner where after they have taken a decision thereon, the order of the writ court stands complied with. The contempt proceedings are, therefore, closed. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 24-04-2026 Sarvar