Sr. No. 5 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CJ Court Case: LPA No. 77/2025 in [WP(C) No. 28/2025] Cav No. 191/2025 UT of J&K and ors. …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through: Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG V/s Raghav Suri and ors. …. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Rudhar Partap Singh, Advocate for caveators. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJESH OSWAL, JUDGE. ORDER(ORAL) 29.04.2025 1. This is an intra-court appeal filed under Clause 12 of the Letter Patent against the order dated January 2, 2025 passed by the learned Single Judge: “1. Upon coming up the instant matter for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioners invited the attention of this Court to order dated 24.12.2024 passed in WP(C) No. 3049/2024 and submits that the controversy involved therein in the said petition is identical to the controversy involved in the instant petition and as such, prays for similar interim relief as has been granted therein in the said petition in terms of order dated 24.12.2024 (supra). 2. Heard, considered and perused the record. 3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case in hand as also the order dated 24.12.2024 in order to maintain consistency between the orders passed by the Court arising --2-- out of the similar matters, a case for indulgence and grant of interim relief as has been granted in WP(C) No. 3049/2024 dated 24.12.2024 (supra) is made out. 4. Issue notice to the respondents in the main petition as well as in the CM. 5. List along with WP(C) No. 3049/2024 on 10.02.2025. 6. In the meantime, subject to objections and till next date before the Bench, the petitioners shall be permitted to participate in the process of selection to the post of Sub- Inspector advertised in terms of Advertisement No. 02 of 2024 dated 22.11.2024 at their own risk and responsibility, however, the result of the selection of the petitioners shall be kept in a sealed cover and shall await orders of this Court. 7. At this stage, Mr. Bhanu Jasrotia, GA and Ms. Priyanka Bhat appears and accept notice on behalf of respondents 1, 2 and 3. Objections by or before the next date of hearing”. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that aggrieved by the order dated December 24, 2024 passed in WP(C)3049/2024 (ibid), the appellants had approached this Court vide LPA No. 75 of 2025 (UT of J&K and ors. Vs. Dinesh Singh Chib and ors.), which was dismissed as withdrawn on April 21, 2025 with liberty prayed for: “1. This is an intra-court appeal under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent against an order dated December 24, 2024, passed by the learned Single Judge. 2. Ex facie, vide impugned order, the learned Single Judge had issued notice to the respondents for February 10, 2025 and, in the meanwhile, had permitted the respondents (petitioners) to participate in the selection process for the post of Sub-Inspector at their own risk and responsibility, though, it was observed that the result shall be kept in a sealed cover and would be subject to further orders to be passed by the Court. --3-- 3. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that objections on behalf of the appellants have already been furnished. She submits that even an application No. 107/2025 has been moved seeking modification of the impugned order, since, for the reasons indicated therein, it is not viable for the appellants to join the respondents in the selection process which is already at an advanced stage. She asserts that even previously, the respondents had availed the age relaxation under Advertisement Notification No. 06/ 2021, but failed to qualify. 4. Concededly, the learned Single Judge is in seizin of the matter as also the application seeking modification of the impugned order, in which notice has been issued to the respondents. Further a prayer has also been made in the said application to stay the order dated December 24, 2024. Thus, in the given circumstances, this Court is rather dissuaded to interfere. 5. Faced with this, learned counsel for the appellants, as always, fairly submits that, for the present, she be permitted to withdraw the appeal. And the matter being time sensitive and requires immediate consideration, the appellants be granted liberty to move appropriate application before the learned Single Judge to prepone the hearing in the main case as also in the application No. 107/2025 which is posted for May 31, 2025. 6. As prayed, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty prayed for.” 3. Upon being pointedly asked, learned counsel for the appellants submits that objections on behalf of the respondents No. 1 and 3 in the writ petition bearing No. WP(C) 28/2025, had already been submitted. Further, even the response by respondent No. 2 therein shall also be filed at the earliest. However, she submits that unlike in LPA No. 75/2025 (ibid) the appellants have yet not moved any application seeking modification of the --4-- order dated January, 2, 2025 or even seeking preponement of hearing the matter, which is posted along with WP(C) No. 3049/2024 for May 31, 2025. 4. In the wake of the positions sketched out above, we rather consider it expedient, for the present, to dispose of the appeal to enable the appellants to move an appropriate application before the learned Single Judge seeking modification/review/recalling of the impugned order and/or to prepone the hearing in the writ petition, for the reasons/grounds that have been set out in detail in the objections that have already been filed. 5. We are sanguine that, in the event, any such application(s) is moved, the same shall be taken cognizance by the learned Single Judge and shall be dealt with at the earliest with regard to the factual position obtaining in the matter at hand in accordance with law. Disposed of accordingly. (RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Jammu 29.04.2025 Suraj K Singh