HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) CM(M) No. 98/2025 Muneer Ahmad Wani …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Mir Manzoor Ahmad, Advocate. q vs Ghulam Mohi Ud Din Sheikh & Ors. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SEKHRI, JUDGE ORDER 18.03.2025 01. Vide order dated 24.09.2024, passed by learned Sub-Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Kupwara [“ the Executing Court”], salary head of the petitioner came to be attached and District Treasury Officer Kupwara was directed to take necessary steps in this regard, in an execution petition preferred by the respondents. Subsequently, an application came to be preferred before the Executing Court by one Zubair Ahmad on behalf of the respondents for detachment of the said account on the premise that employees were suffering on account of attachment of the salary head of the office of non-applicant no. 2. The Executing Court, vide order dated 20.11.2024 directed the District Treasury Officer Kupwara to deposit an amount of Rs. 3,72,750/- in the bank account of each of the applicants, out of the attached salary head of respondent no. 2 i.e. Chief Horticulture Officer District Kupwara and in case, there was less amount then Rs. 18,63,750/- in the said salary head, the amount available was directed to be distributed equally among the bank accounts of all the five applicants and it was ordered that in case of compliance, the attachment order of the salary head of Chief Horticulture Officer District Kupwara shall be deemed to be withdrawn. The aforesaid order dated 20.11.2024 came to be assailed by the petitioner in the 84 2 CM 98/2025 Court of Principal District Judge Kupwara [“ the Revisional Court”], who vide order dated 18.12.2024, though defreezed salary head of the petitioner but District Treasury Officer Kupwara was directed not to release his salary till the award passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Kupwara was satisfied or an undertaking is furnished to the satisfaction of the Executing Court that wages of the respondents shall be released in their favour within a time frame. As a sequel, petitioner was granted liberty by the Revisional Court to approach the Executing Court for the release of his salary and the said Court was directed to consider the case of the petitioner in case any motion in this respect was made. 02. After detailed submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has already laid a motion before the Executing Court, pursuant to order dated 18.12.2024 passed by the Revisional Court, however, the Executing Court has not decided the same till date. 03. Having regard to the limited nature of controversy, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Executing Court i.e. Sub-Judge Kupwara to consider and dispose of the application preferred by the petitioner, in the light of the order dated 18.12.2024, passed by the Revisional Court within a period of one week, from the date copy of this order is made available. 04. Disposed of. (Rajesh Sekhri) Judge Jammu 18.03.2025 Abinash