07 Regular HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(S) No. 443/2022 In SWP No. 1962/2013 Mohammad Ashraf Reshi ….. Petitioner (s) Through: Mr. Prince Hamza, Adv. V/s Mr. Alok Kumar and anr. ….. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Hakeem Aman, Dy. AG Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge ORDER 27.05.2025 1. The petitioner, through the medium of present contempt petition is, seeking implementation of the order dated 05.08.2014 passed by the learned writ Court whereby the respondents were directed to consider the case of the petitioner for reviewing of his suspension order within six weeks. 2. Statement of facts/compliance report has been filed by the respondents. In the statement of facts/compliance report, it has been submitted that after passing of the order dated 05.08.2014 by the writ Court, Government Order dated 30.06.2015, was issued whereby the petitioner was prematurely retired from service w.e.f 01st July 2015. It has been further submitted that the aforesaid Government Order came to be challenged by the P a g e | 2 CCP(S) No. 443/2022 In SWP No. 1962/2013 petitioner before this Court in SWP No. 1527/2015 and vide judgment dated 07.08.2018, the said Government order was quashed by this Court. LPA as well as SLP against the judgment dated 07.08.2018 stand dismissed. The statement of facts/compliance report further indicates that the petitioner ultimately attained the age of superannuation on 31.12.2018. 3. In view of the subsequent developments that have taken place in the present case, the implementation of order dated 05.08.2024 has been rendered superfluous. Therefore, there was no occasion for the respondents to implement the said order. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that because the respondents did not take a decision in accordance with order of the writ court passed on 05.08.2014, the petitioner is shown to have been under suspension w.e.f 23.03.2012 to 31.12.2018 and they have not taken any decision with regard to the fate of the period of suspension. It has been contended that had the respondents taken a decision in accordance with the order of the writ Court, the period of suspension of the petitioner would be much less. P a g e | 3 CCP(S) No. 443/2022 In SWP No. 1962/2013 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner may be right in his submission but this aspect of the matter will have to be taken into account by the competent authority at the time of deciding the fate of suspension period after the criminal case against the petitioner comes to an end. However, at this stage, due to the subsequent developments narrated hereinbefore, implementation of the order dated 05-08-2014 passed by the writ court has been rendered superfluous. It appears that respondents/contemnors have not implemented the said order due to the aforesaid subsequent developments. Thus, it cannot be stated that the respondents/contemnors have willfully avoided to implement the order of the writ Court. 6. For the forgoing reasons, no case for proceeding against the respondents is made out. The contempt proceedings are closed and the petition is disposed of. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 27.05.2025 Aasif