HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CONSW No. 28/2018 in [SWP No. 2106/2006] CM No. 6446/2019 CM No. 5873/2019 c/w CPSW No. 590/2018 Dharam Pal …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sachin Sharma, Advocate. Vs Ranjana Sharma & Ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. R K Jain, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Mohit Jain, Advocate CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M A CHOWDHARY, JUDGE ORDER (29.07.2025) CONSW No.28/2018 01. For the reasons stated in the application, coupled with the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant at the Bar, the same is allowed. Delay in filing the Review Petition is condoned. CONSW No.28/2018 is disposed of. 02. Registry is directed to diarise the Review Petition filed by the petitioner- Dharam Pal. RP No.27/2025 & CPSW No.590/2018 03. This Court in SWP No.2106/2006 titled ‘Ranjana Sharma Vs. State & Ors.’ while allowing the petition directing the respondents to create a supernumerary post, for the petitioner therein to be appointed as R-e-T and later to be regularised as General Line Teacher, besides burdening respondent No.4, the then Zonal Education Officer, Lakhanpur, Kathua, with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid, to the petitioner. Serial No. 05 2 CONSW No.28/2018 & CPSW No.590/2018 04. On filing of the contempt petition being CPSW No.590/2018, the order with regard to the appointment of the petitioner, Ranjana Sharma, was stated to have been complied with. However, respondent- ZEO namely Dharam Pal moved a petition seeking review of the order whereby he was burdened with costs. During the pendency of this petition, the petitioner- Dharam Pal, who was to pay the costs to respondent, Ranjana Sharma, are stated to have agreed amicably with regard to payment of 50% of the costs. 05. Mr. R. K. Jain, learned senior counsel appearing for respondent No.1, Ranjana Sharma, submits that respondent, Ranjana Sharma, has been issued a cheque bearing No.049813 dated 29.07.2025 amounting to Rs.25,000/-, which has been accepted as a full and final payment of costs, of Rs.50,000/, from the review petitioner, Dharam Pal and prayed that the contempt petition be disposed of and the contempt proceedings be dropped against the petitioner, Dharam Pal. 06. In view of the settlement reached between the parties, it will be in the fitness of things, if the matter is given a quietus, from being further dragged. The proceedings initiated with regard to recovery of costs is, thus, disposed of as settled between the parties. 07. In view of complete compliance of the order passed by this Court in SWP No.2106/2006, both the Contempt Petition as well as Review Petition are disposed of and the contempt proceedings are dropped. JUDGE ( ( M A Chowdhary ) Judge Jammu 29.07.2025 Narinder Narinder Kumar 2025.07.29 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document