GHULAM RASOOL MIR(PERSONAL APPEARANCE) v. MISS MANDEEP KAUR AND ANR. (RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT)
CCP(S)/253/2022 · 2025-09-02
Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
Contempt Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7786 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7786 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Serial No. 11 Regular List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
CCP(S) No. 253/2022 in
SWP No. 1238/2016
Ghulam Rasool Mir ….. Appellant/petitioner(s) Through: - Mr. M. A. Beigh, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Irfan Rasool, Advocate
V/S Miss Mandeep Kaur and Anr.
….. Respondent(s) Through: - Ms. Raheela, AC vice Mr. A. R. Malik, Sr. AAG
CORAM:
HON’BLE MS JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE
(ORDER) 02.09.2025
01. By this petition, the petitioner has alleged non-compliance of
order/Judgment dated 12.09.2017. Paragraph 5 of the said
order/Judgment being relevant is taken note of:-
“ 5. In this view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to make a detailed representation espousing his claim to the respondents. Upon receipt of such representation along with a copy of this order, the respondents shall accord consideration to the claim of the petitioner within a period of eight weeks’ from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.”
02. Compliance report stands filed by the respondents, it is stated that the respondents have considered afresh the case of petitioner in light of the
order/Judgment dated 12.09.2017, passed by this Court in SWP No. 1238/2016. Respondents have also placed on record the consideration
order No. 497-DRDK of 2025 dated 02.07.2025, whereby the claim of the petitioner after re-examination, has been rejected, as such, the respondents have complied with the order dated 12.09.2017 in its letter Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
and spirit. Therefore, the instant contempt petition is closed. However,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not satisfied with the consideration order dated 02.07.2025, passed by the respondents. Petitioner is at liberty to challenge the consideration
order dated 02.07.2025, if he so chooses.
(MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI)
JUDGE SRINAGAR 02.09.2025
“Mohammad Yasin Dar”
Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document