Serial No.13 REGULAR CAUSE LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(D) 21/2024 IMTIYAZ MANZOOR LONE AND ORS. …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Moomin Khan, Advocate Vs. SARMAD HAFIZ AND ORS. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Faheem Nisar Shah, GA CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL, JUDGE ORDER 01.08.2025 01. This contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner alleging willful disobedience and non-compliance of the judgment dated 27th March, 2023, passed by this Court in LPA No. 25/2023. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under: “For the forgoing reasons, we do not find any good ground in this appeal to interfere with the well reasoned judgment of the writ Court. The appeal is accordingly, disposed of by providing that in case the respondents initiate fresh process of selection to fill up Rahber-e-Khel in zone Drugmulla, the petitioners, if they were otherwise eligible in terms of the earlier Advertisement Notification, shall be allowed to participate and considered in the selection notwithstanding that they have by now crossed the Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 01.08.2025 maximum age prescribed for engagement as a Rehber- e-Khel. Needless to say that we have not given any declaration with regard to the genuineness of the testimonials of the writ petitioners in any manner. Disposed of along with connected CM” 02. From the perusal of the operative portion of the judgment, it clearly transpires that there is no direction issued by the Court to necessarily initiate a fresh process of selection of Rehbar-e-Khel in Zone Drugmulla. The judgment only provides that in the event the respondents decide to initiate a fresh selection process, the petitioners, if they are otherwise eligible, shall be allowed to participate in the same, notwithstanding that they may have with the passage of time crossed the maximum age prescribed for recruitment. 03. It is not the case of the petitioners that any fresh advertisement has been issued and they have been denied the benefit of age relaxation. In the absence of the aforesaid, there is no case made out for filing contempt petition for non-compliance and violation of the order passed by the Court dated 27th March, 2022, supra. This contempt petition is premature and the same is accordingly dismissed. (VINOD CHATTERJI KOUL) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE SRINAGAR: 01.08.2025 “Mir Arif” Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 01.08.2025