Serial No. 60 Regular Cause List. HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR ******* CCP(S) 379/2024 in[WP(C) 127/2021] CM(6441/2025). SHABIR AHMAD LONE. …Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Gulzar Sopori, Advocate. VERSUS IRFAN HAFIZ. Through: Mr. Bikramdeep Singh, Dy. AG. …Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE. ORDER 03-07-2026 01. The petitioner, through the medium of the present Contempt Petition, has sought implementation of Order dated 30th of August 2024 passed by the learned Writ Court, whereby a direction has been issued to the respondents that the petitioner shall be paid the wages for the period he has worked with the respondents and also to consider his case for appointment on compassionate grounds under such rules as and when the vacancy accrues. 02. The respondents, vide application bearing CM No. 6441 of 2025, have placed on record a copy of the Consideration Order dated 28th of August 2025. In the Consideration Order, it has been mentioned that the case of the petitioner for grant of appointment on compassionate grounds has been considered and it has been found that the petitioner is not eligible on the ground that he has been married for the last ten years and being married brother of the deceased employee, he cannot be stated to be dependent on the deceased. Accordingly, the respondents have rejected the petitioner's claim for appointment on compassionate grounds. 03. The direction of the learned Writ Court was only to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate grounds in accordance with the rules, which they have done. If at all the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the Consideration Order that has been passed by the respondents, he has the option to challenge the same by way of an appropriate proceedings. He cannot challenge the legality of the said Consideration Order in the present contempt proceedings, as the same is beyond the scope of the contempt jurisdiction. 04. With regard to the claim for wages, the respondents, in their Statement of Facts, have submitted that the petitioner had worked as a casual labourer through an outsourcing agency/Contractor till 1st of May 2021 and he has been paid wages for the said period, whereafter, the petitioner has voluntarily and out of his own will left the casual engagement and never reported back for duty w.e.f 2nd of May 2021. On this ground, it has been submitted that no wages are outstanding. To substantiate their assertions, the respondents have placed on record a copy of the Attendance Register. Thus, as per the case set up by the respondents, no wages are due to the petitioner. 05. The order passed by the learned Writ Court stands complied with. If at all the petitioner has any claim against the respondents, he has to establish the same in appropriate proceedings. 06. In view of the above, the contempt proceedings are closed, leaving it open to the petitioner to take resort to appropriate remedy as may be available to him in law. 07. Disposed of along with connected CMs. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 03-07-2026 Showkat Khan