Sr. No. 21 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU SWP No. 300/2013 c/w SWP No. 2629/2012 Mohd. Majid and Anr. …. Petitioner(s) Through:- None. V/s State of J&K and Ors. …..Respondent(s) Through:- None. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE ORDER 21.02.2025 1. The record reveals that the instant petition was listed before this Court on 13.02.2013, on which date, a notices were issued to the respondents and since then, the petitioners have not come up before this Court for more than 12 years and even no effort has been made on part of the petitioner to get the instant petition listed. 2. Today also, when the instant petition was taken up, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Otherwise also, in the light of the stand taken by the respondents, the instant petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. 3. The petitioners have contended that they are entitled to be regularized by virtue of a cabinet decision No. 88/07 dated 20.05.2008 which contention is misplaced as the said cabinet decision is applicable only to the contractual employees in pursuance to SRO-255 of 2003 dated 05.08.2003. 4. As per the stand of the respondents, the petitioners have been engaged on the basis of academic arrangements and not in pursuance of any contractual appointment in terms of SRO-255 of 2003 and, as such, the petitioners were not entitled to any relief. 5. Thus, in the light of the stand taken by the respondents, no fruitful purpose will be served to keep the instant petition alive as the petitioners are not interested in pursuing the instant petition and, even on merits, the petition is not maintainable. 6. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed as the same is not maintainable. 7. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated. SWP No. 2629/2012 1. It has been brought to the notice of this Court by learned counsel for the respondents that the instant petition with the efflux of time has been rendered infructuous. 2. The present petition has come up before this Court after 13 years and during this intervening period, no efforts have been made by the petitioners to get the instant petition listed and today also, there is no representation on their behalf as well. It seems that the petitioners have lost interest in prosecuting the instant petition. 3. The instant petition is, accordingly, dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. 4. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated. (Wasim Sadiq Nargal) Judge Jammu: 21.02.2025 Neha-1