HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CCP(S) No. 271/2021 in OWP No. 786/2009 Ajit Singh …..Petitioner(s) Through: None Vs Ajay Kumar Bhalla & Ors .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI with Mr. Karan Sharma, CGSC Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE ORDER (01.07.2026) 01. Mr. Vishal Sharma, learned DSGI appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 5 submits that the order/judgment passed by the Writ Court stands complied with in its letter and spirit and the respondents have also placed on record the detailed speaking order along with the statement of facts, which have been filed vide Annexure-R-20. The learned Writ Court by virtue of order dated 18.09.2020 has been pleased to dispose of the writ petition in the following manner: “25.Viewed thus in aforesaid backdrop, this petition is accordingly disposed of in the following terms. "Respondents 1 to 5 shall reconsider and revisit the case of insurance claim of the petitioner under SPBY Scheme as also for release of any other reliefs / compensation to which the petitioner may be entitled thereto, qua the disability petitioner is suffering from, keeping in view facts, circumstances, relevant rules and regulations within a period of two months from the date of passing of this order, decision whereof shall be communicated to the petitioner within one week thereafter". In the event, petitioner is aggrieved of any decision so taken by the respondents, he shall be free to agitate the same in appropriate proceedings available to him under law.” S. No. 23 2 CCP(S) No. 271/2021 02. The respondents while filing reply affidavit have placed on record the detailed consideration order dated 14.01.2021 as Annexure-R-20, wherein the case of the petitioner has been rejected being devoid of any merit for the grant of insurance claim under SPBY claim and other reliefs, as prayed for by him. 03. Thus, this Court after perusing the aforesaid order of consideration is of the view that the order/judgment passed by the learned Writ Court stands complied with. Therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep this contempt petition alive. 04. Accordingly, the proceedings in the instant contempt petition are closed. Rule, if any, shall stand discharged. However, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the aforesaid consideration order by way of appropriate proceedings, if so advised. (WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE JAMMU 01.07.2026 Vijay Vijay Kumar 2026.07.01 17.16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document