CCP(S) No.72/2023 Page No. 1 of 2 Item No.103 Suppl. List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(S) No.72/2023 ABDUL RASHID BHAT …PETITIONER(S) Through: - Mr. B. A. Misri, Advocate. Vs. MR. G. PRASANNA RAMASWAMY & ANR. …RESPONDENT(S) Through: - Mr. Furkan Yaqoob, GA. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER(0RAL) 31.05.2025 1) The petitioner, through the medium of present petition, has sought implementation of order dated 03.12.2021 passed by this Court, whereby the respondents were directed to accord consideration to the claim of the petitioner for payment of minimum wages in terms of SRO 460 of 2017. 2) As per the statement of facts filed by the respondents in March, 2025, the total outstanding wages towards the petitioner were found to be Rs.5,460,46. As per the latest status report, the respondents have transferred an amount of Rs.5,460,47/ in the account of the petitioner. The details of the transactions have also been given in the compliance report. 3) The receipt of aforesaid amount has not been disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner but he has contended CCP(S) No.72/2023 Page No. 2 of 2 that the respondents have not released the wages upto date in favour of the petitioners. 4) The order of the Writ Court was delivered on 03.12.2021 and the direction passed upon the respondents was to consider claim of the petitioner and, obviously, claim of the petitioner was confined upto the date of order of the Writ Court and there was no continuous Mandamus issued against the respondents. The amount due and assessed in favour of the petitioner was found to be Rs.5,460,46/ in accordance with the mandate of order of the Writ Court, which the petitioner has, admittedly, received. He cannot convert these contempt proceedings into an execution petition in perpetuity when the Writ Court has not passed a continuous Mandamus against the respondents. If at all any fresh cause of action has accrued in favour of the petitioner, he is at liberty to avail appropriate legal remedy but these contempt proceedings cannot be continued against the respondents, once they have paid the outstanding wages to the petitioner. 5) Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are closed and the contempt petition shall stand disposed of. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge Srinagar, 31.05.2025 “Bhat Altaf” Whether the order is reportable: YES/NO Mohammad Altaf Bhat I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 03.06.2025 23:41