1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR LPA No. 125/2025 CM No. 3789/2025 Imtiyaz Ali Banday and Ors. ……...Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Arshad Andrabi, Advocate Versus State of J&K and Ors. …..Respondent(s) Through: CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE O R D E R 30.06.2025 01. Heard learned counsel for the appellants. 02. An application filed by the appellants on 30.05.2013, purportedly in terms of Rule 67 (2) of J&K High Court Rules, 1999, came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 01.12.2023 on the ground that in essence, it was filed to enforce the order dated 03.10.2002 passed in OWP No. 358/2001, after a period of more than ten years. Simultaneously costs of Rs. 5,000/- were also imposed upon the appellants. As the costs were not deposited by the appellants, CM No. 38/2024 was registered and listed before the learned Single Judge. Vide order dated 11.03.2025 passed in CM No. 38/2024, the learned Single Judge after taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants that the basic order dated 01.12.2023, suffered from irregularity and illegality and the appellants were intending to lay a formal motion for review/modification of the order dated Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 2 01.12.2023, granted four weeks’ time to the appellants to take appropriate steps in the matter. Thereafter, vide order dated 21.04.2025, after taking note of the absence of the appellants and non-filing of any application for review/modification of order dated 01.12.2023, learned Single Judge issued non-bailable warrants against the appellants for securing their presence through SSP concerned and notified the matter for 21.05.2025. 03. Through the medium of instant Intra Court Appeal, the appellants have assailed the orders dated 01.12.2023 and 21.04.2025, passed by the learned Single Judge on the ground that even after the disposal of the writ petition, the appellants could have filed the miscellaneous application, which has been wrongly dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 01.12.2023. 04. In response to the query of this Court, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the appellants have deposited the costs of Rs. 5,000/-, but have not filed any application for review /modification of order dated 01.12.2023, meaning thereby they have accepted the order dated 01.12.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge, without reserving right to assail the order dated 01.12.2023. 05. Be that as it may, the appellants despite making submissions before the learned Single Judge that the order dated 01.12.2023, passed by the learned Single Judge was illegal and irregular and they intended to move a formal application for review/modification of order dated 01.12.2023, did not file the said application and instead filed this Intra Court Appeal, only when the coercive measures were resorted to, by the learned Single Judge for recovery of costs of Rs. 5,000/-. Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 3 06. After examining the application and order dated 01.12.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the application was dismissed, we find the appellants had no cause to file such application that too after ten years of the disposal of the writ petition, as rightly observed by the learned Single Judge. 07. Viewed thus, we do not find any merit in this Intra Court Appeal and the same is, accordingly, dismissed along with all connected CM(s). (RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Srinagar 30.06.2025 “Mohammad Yasin Dar” Whether the Judgment is reportable: Yes/No. Mohammad Yaseen Dar I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document