HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case: CM No. 1098/2026 IN CCP(S) No. 327/2025 Karmat Hussain ..... Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through :- Mr. Rahoof Khan, Advocate Vs Mohd. Rashid Executive Engineer, PWD, Rajouri and Anr. .....Respondent(s) Through :- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE ORDER 30.03.2026 The instant application has been preferred seeking revival of the contempt petition No. 327/2025 in terms of order dated 29.09.2025, whereby the respondents were granted four weeks’ time to do the needful, failing which, the petitioner was given liberty to revive the contempt petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in order to advance his arguments, has drawn the attention of this Court to the basic order passed by the learned writ Court. A perusal thereof reveals that the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 3 to 5 to consider the grievance of the petitioner as projected in the writ petition and to take a decision thereupon in accordance with law and rules holding the field. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that although consideration has been accorded in terms of the aforesaid order, but the same is not in consonance with the order/judgment passed by the learned writ Court, and therefore, the instant application seeking revival of the contempt petition has been filed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner in the instant application. This Court is of the opinion that, in light of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the order of the learned writ Court stands implemented, as the necessary consideration has been accorded in terms thereof. While exercising the contempt jurisdiction, this Court cannot enlarge the scope of the Sr. No. 185 2 | P a g e CM No. 1098/2025 IN CCP(S) No. 327/2025 writ Court order. Whatever was required on part of the respondents have already been done and the necessary consideration stands accorded. Since the petitioner is aggrieved of the said consideration, he is at liberty to challenge the same by way of appropriate proceedings, as the contempt is not the appropriate remedy. This Court is of the view that the order passed by the learned writ Court duly stands complied with. Thus, there is no justifiable reason for filing the instant application seeking revival of the contempt proceedings. Although, consideration has been undertaken, the same is not acceptable to the petitioner and it has also been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such specific order of consideration has been passed by the respondents. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. However, dismissal of the instant application shall not come in the way of the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy under law for challenging the said consideration order, and to agitate his cause afresh on all available grounds. (WASIM SADIQ NARGAL) JUDGE JAMMU 30.03.2026 Mihul