Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14534 (JK)

RASHPAL SINGH v. SARMAD HAFEEZ (TOURISM DEPARTMENT) (SWP/904/2019)

CCP(S)/533/2022 · 2025-10-14

Moksha Khajuria Kazmi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Serial No. 15 Regular List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(S) No. 533/2022 in SWP No. 904/2019 Rashpal Singh ….. Appellant/petitioner(s) Through: - Mr. Mir Majid Bashir, Advocate V/S Sarmad Hafeez ….. Respondent(s) Through: - Mr. Waseem Gul, GA CORAM: HON’BLE MS JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE (ORDER) 14.10.2025 01. By this petition, petitioner has alleged non-compliance of order dated 02.08.2022, passed in SWP No. 904/2019, whereby the said writ petition has been disposed of with a direction to respondents to consider the claim of petitioner for promotion to the next higher post in tune with mandate of law. 02. Respondent has filed compliance report, it is stated that in pursuance to direction passed by this Court on 02.08.2022, the case of the petitioner was duly placed before the competent authority and examined strictly in accordance with the applicable Recruitment Rules of 2005, governing the service conditions of officers of Sheri-i-Kashmir International Conference Centre (SKICC). The competent authority has passed the consideration order dated 26.08.2025, whereby the case of the petitioner was Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document duly considered and rejected in compliance with the directions dated 02.08.2022, being devoid of any merit and for want of vacancy. Respondents have placed on record the consideration order dated 26.08.2025. 03. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the consideration order dated 26.08.2025, has not been accorded by the competent authority, as per the petitioner the competent authority is Administrative Secretary, however, the order has been passed by the Director, SKICC. Learned counsel for the respondents has contended that consideration order has been passed by the competent authority, strictly in conformity with order dated 02.08.2022. 04. Be that as it may, the respondents have implemented the order passed by this Court on 02.08.2022, in its letter and spirit, therefore, the contempt proceedings are closed. However, petitioner is at liberty to challenge the consideration order dated 26.08.2025, if he chooses so. (MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 14.10.2025 “Mohammad Yasin Dar” Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document