Serial No. 28 Reg CAUSE LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR LPA 133/2025 in [WP(C) 485/2021] RAFIQA BEGUM …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Bilal Ahmad Malla, Advocate Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CRPF CGO COMPLEX LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI AND ORS ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. T.M. Shamsi, DSGI with Ms Rehana, Advocate for R 1-4 Mr. A.R. Bhat, Advocate for R 5-6 CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE ORDER 23.12.2025 1. Impugned in this intra court appeal filed by the appellant is an interim order dated 30.05.2025, passed by learned Single Judge of this Court [“Writ Court”] in WP(C) No. 485/ 2021 tilted Saida Begum and Anr. Vs. Director General of Police CRPF & Ors., whereby the Writ Court has directed Respondent No.2 to deduct 50% of the salary of the appellant every month and credit the same into the accounts of the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 as maintenance from the Month of June 2025. 2. During the course of arguments, learned counsel appearing for the parties submitted that having regard to the nature of controversy involved, the parties have agreed on certain mutual terms subject to which, this appeal as well as the writ petition pending before the Writ Court can be settled. 3. 2. Mr. Bilal Ahmad Malla, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that Respondent Nos. 5 & 6 who are mother and father of the deceased Yasir Mohammad Khan-husband of the appellant have already received more than 60% of the ex- gratia/terminal benefits of the deceased and their case for family pension is under process with the official respondents. He would further submit that in case the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6 do not insist upon maintenance from the appellant who has been engaged in the CRPF as Constable on compassionate grounds, the appellant shall also forebear from objecting to the family pension case pending consideration before the respondent-authorities. 4. 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 5 & 6 agrees to the proposal put forth by Mr. Malla, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. 5. 4. In view of the aforesaid consensus arrived at between the parties, the writ petition i.e WP(C) No. 485/2021 is disposed of by providing as under:- 6. i. “The Respondents 5 & 6 shall not interfere or cause any interference in the job of the appellant as “Mahila Constable” in CRPF nor shall they raise any demand for any maintenance or compensation from her”. 7. ii. In lieu of the aforesaid, the appellant shall not interfere or cause any interference in the pension case of the respondent Nos. 5 & 6 which is pending consideration before the respondent-authorities. She undertakes not to raise any objection or take the matter to any Court of law in this regard. 8. Iii. The ex-gratia/terminal benefits have already been disbursed in terms of agreement dated 10.04.2014 entered into between the appellant and respondent No. 5 & 6. 9. 5. The WP(C) No.485/2021 is thus disposed of in terms of above, as a result whereof, this LPA is rendered infructuous and the same is accordingly dismissed. 10. 6. Needless to say that in case, the case of respondent Nos. 5 & 6 is pending with the official respondents for family pension same shall be considered and final orders passed thereon within a period of two months from today. 11. (SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE SRINAGAR: