HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CJ Court CCP(D) No. 6/2025 In WP(C) PIL No. 12/2023 Sugandha Sawhney …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Ajay Gandotra, Advocate. vs Shri V Uma Shankar Secretary to Government of India Ministry of Road and ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG Mr. Vipan Gandotra, Advocate Mr. Nishant Awama, Advocate. Coram: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE ORDER 10.11.2025 1. On April 21, 2025, the Court had passed the following order:- “1. Mr. Vipan Gandotra, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that the necessary affidavit (No. 1 of 2025) in response to the contempt petition, has already been filed, but, somehow, the same has not been appended with the petition. 2. With reference to order dated 25.02.2025, out of which, the present contempt arises, he submits that the National Highways Authority of India has assailed the said order vide Special Leave to Appeal No. 9220/2025. And the Supreme Court on 15.04.2025 has issued notice for 19.05.2025 and has ordered that in the meanwhile the National Highways Authority of India would continue to recover the toll at the rate of 75% in accordance with the prevailing rules. He submits that, in fact, the Court had even stayed the operation of the order dated 25.02.2025, but owing to a typographical mistake, it was not reflected in the order. Accordingly, it is urged that the matter was Serial No. 25 2 CCP(D) No. 6/2025 mentioned before the Bench today morning itself and the order dated 15.04.2025 has since been rectified. He prays for a short accommodation to place on record the said order, as also the affidavit, as indicated above. 3. Adjourned to 14.05.2025.” 2. Today, at the outset, learned counsel appearing for National Highway Authority of India has shared with us a copy of the order dated 19.05.2025 and submits that the matter is still pending consideration. 3. Having argued the matter at some length, learned counsel for the parties submit that in the given circumstances, let the petition at hand be disposed of, for the present, with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application seeking its revival and appropriate orders if the situation so warrants. 4. In wake of the position sketched out above and in terms of the statements made by the learned counsel for the parties, the instant petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty as prayed for. (RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Jammu 10.11.2025 Sahil Padha Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No. Sahil Padha 2025.11.10 16:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document