Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Jammu and Kashmir · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8320 (JK)

FAROOQ AHMAD LONE AND ORS. v. SALIM UR REHMAN (YOUTH SERVICES AND SPORTS DEPARTMENT) (SWP/946/2018)

CCP(S)/399/2020 · 2025-05-23

Sanjay Dhar

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Serial No. 24. Regular Cause List. HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(S) 399/2020 in[SWP 946/2018]. FAROOQ AHMAD LONE AND ORS. …Petitioner(s) Through: None. VERSUS SALIM UR REHMAN. Through: Mr. Faheem Nisar Shah, GA. …Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE. ORDER 23.05.2025 01. Through the medium of the present contempt petition, petitioners are seeking implementation of Order dated 04.05.2018 passed by the Writ Court whereby respondent No. 2 was directed to place the cases of the petitioners, who are In-charge Physical Education Masters before the DPC for consideration of regularization of their services as Physical Education Masters, subject to the conditions that the petitioners are eligible, the posts are available and the petitioners are entitled to promotion in view of their position and seniority. 02. Latest Compliance Report filed by the respondents indicates that the cases of the petitioners for regularization of their promotion has been placed before the relevant Committee but because the petitioners have obtained higher qualification without seeking permission from the competent authority and no post-facto permission was granted, they could not be promoted and even their temporary placement orders stand withdrawn which is under challenge before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar. 03. Direction from the Writ Court to the respondents was only to place the cases of the petitioners for regularization to their promotion before the Committee, which they have done and the said Committee has not found the petitioners eligible for the reason that they have obtained the higher qualification without seeking permission from the competent authority. 04. Having regard to the fact that the judgement of the Writ Court stands complied with, there is no ground to proceed against the respondents. Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are closed. 05. Disposed of (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 23.05.2025 Showkat Khan