S.No. HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM No. 4225/2025 in LPA N0. 148/2025 CM No. 4226/2025 Reserved on: 16.07.2025 Pronounced on: 22.07.2025 UT of J&K & Ors. …Petitioner/ Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Wasim Gul, GA V/s Farooq Ahmad Sangoo …Respondent(s) Through: CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE JUDGMENT 1. As per the report submitted by Registry of this Court, there is a delay of 1189 days in filing the intra court appeal against the judgment dated 05.08.2022 passed by the learned writ court whereby the writ petition preferred by the respondent was disposed of by directing the applicants to consider the claim of the respondent and pass a speaking order in that regard within two months from the date of receipt of order. 2. The condonation of delay is being sought on the grounds, as narrated in para 3 of the application, which is reproduced as under:- 3. The appellant, upon reviewing the judgment dated 05.08.2022, wherein the Hon’ble Court directed to Nuzhat Shafi I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.07.2025 16:41 accord fresh consideration in favour of the petitioner, decided to comply by issuing a consideration order. Accordingly, SKIMS passed a consideration order dated 12.02.2024, rejecting the petitioner’s claim for promotion to Assistant Material Management Officer being devoid of any merit. The petitioner then initiated contempt proceedings against the respondents via CCP (S) No. 480/2022. The Hon’ble Court, while reviewing the contempt petition, found the consideration order dated 12.02.2024 unsatisfactory and directed SKIMS to reconsider the petitioner’s claim a new. SKIMS issued a consideration order on 12.02.2024, fully complying with the judgment dated 05.08.2022. Despite this, the Hon’ble Court, in contempt proceedings (CCP (S) No. 480/2022) has not appreciated this compliance and insists on re- consideration of the matter. The central issue of this appeal is also whether the writ court, during contempt proceedings, has the authority to demand reconsideration of a matter already considered by SKIMS, as evidenced by the consideration order. The matter was referred to the Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs through the Health and Medical Education Department to explore alternative remedies, as the Court continued to rejected SKIMS consideration orders. The Department of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs has no issued a sanction dated 02.06.2025 for filing of LPA. 3. A perusal of para mentioned above reveals that the applicants in their wisdom, after perusing the judgment dated 05.08.2022 rendered by the learned writ court, decided to comply the same and accordingly passed the consideration order dated 12.02.2024. 4. It appears that in a contempt petition bearing CCP(S) No. 480/2022, the learned Single Judge did not find the Nuzhat Shafi I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.07.2025 16:41 consideration order dated 12.02.2024 to be in consonance with the judgment dated 05.08.2022 and directed the appellants to consider the claim of the respondent afresh. 5. It is evident that the appellants are aggrieved of the mode and manner in which the learned Single Judge has rejected the consideration order and directed the applicants to reconsider the matter. 6. In fact the appellants are/were not at all aggrieved of the judgment dated 05.08.2022 and rather accepted and acted upon the said judgment by passing the consideration order dated 12.02.2024. The appellants cannot approbate and reprobate because at one hand they are stating that they have complied the judgment dated 05.08.2022 and on the other hand they are assailing the same through the medium of the belated intra court appeal. If applicants are aggrieved of any direction passed by the learned Single Judge while exercising contempt jurisdiction, the applicants ought to have challenged the same, but instead of challenging said order, they are challenging the judgment, which the applicants complied with initially. 7. In view of above, we are of the considered view that the applicants cannot assail the judgment dated 05.08.2022 passed by the learned writ court only on the ground that the learned Single Judge while exercising his contempt jurisdiction has refused to accept the consideration order dated 12.02.2024 issued by the applicants and as such the cause projected by the Nuzhat Shafi I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.07.2025 16:41 applicants for condoning the delay in filing the intra court appeal against the judgment dated 05.08.2022, cannot be termed as sufficient cause for condoning the delay. 8. Accordingly, this application is found to be without any merit and is dismissed. As a corollary to the dismissal of the application for condonation of delay, the accompanying appeal is dismissed as time barred. 9. Dismissed. (RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE SRINAGAR 22 .07.2025 “S. Nuzhat” Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No Nuzhat Shafi I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.07.2025 16:41