Serial No.3 REGULAR CAUSE LIST IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 1660/2025 CM(4297/2025) Riyaz Ahmad Beigh …Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Z.A. Qureshi, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anurag Verma, Advocate Vs. Union Territory of J&K and Ors. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Abdul Rashid Malik, Sr. AAG with Mr. Mohd Younis Hafiz, Assisting Counsel. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE. ORDER 21.07.2025 01. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order dated 19th May, 2025, passed in CP No. 114/2023, titled “Riyaz Ahmad Beigh Vs. Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir and Ors.” 02. Briefly put the facts leading to the filing of petition are that the contempt petition bearing CP No. 114/2023, was filed before the Tribunal for alleged non-compliance of the order dated 28th February, 2023, passed in OA No. 1088/2022, whereby the Tribunal had directed the respondents herein to take a final decision in the matter and pass a formal order in respect of the recommendations made by the MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.07.25 Committee and implement the same within a period of six weeks. 03. In response to the notice issued in the contempt petition, the respondents filed their objections and also placed on record a copy of the consideration order dated 17th February, 2025, rejecting the claim of the petitioner on the ground that he did not possess the prescribed qualification. The Tribunal has vide order impugned accepted the compliance report filed by the respondents and closed the contempt proceedings. 04. The petitioner is, however, aggrieved of the finding returned by the Tribunal to the extent that the petitioner does not possess the prescribed qualification. It is submitted that the aforesaid finding would come in the way of the petitioner to challenge the consideration order for which the Tribunal itself has granted liberty. 05. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, this petition is disposed of by providing that in the matter of challenging the consideration order dated 17th February, 2025, passed by the respondents all submissions on questions of law and fact shall MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.07.25 remain open to the petitioner and nothing said by the Tribunal in the impugned order shall prejudice the parties in any manner. 06. Disposed of. (SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE SRINAGAR: 21.07.2025 “Mir Arif” (i) Whether the order is reportable? Yes/No. (ii) Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No. MIR ARIF MANZOOR I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.07.25