Sr. No.01 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(D) No.68/2024 CM No.1790/2025 Mohammad Sadiq Lone …Petitioner(s)/Appellants. Through: Mr. S. N. Ratanpuri, Advocate, with Ms. Fiza, Advocate. Vs. Suresh Kumar Gupta and others. ….Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Illyas Nazir Laway, GA. Mr. Faheem Nissar Shah, GA. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE O R D E R 30.07.2025 1. Concededly without any formal acquisition, landholding of the petitioner measuring 4 kanals was utilized by the respondent department for an alleged public purpose without payment of any compensation. As a result, he was impelled to approach this Court vide WP(C) No.3227/2019. As a result, the respondent authorities negotiated the matter with the claimants/ land owners and an oral settlement was arrived at between the parties. Pursuant where to, the authorities agreed to pay compensation to land owner @ Rs. 16 lakhs per kanal. And the matter was accordingly disposed of on 10.04.2023. But, since the department failed to carry out its obligation, the petitioner once again, was constrained to approach this Court vide this Contempt Petition [CCP(D) No. 68/2024]. 2. It is not in dispute that during the pendency of this petition, the authorities have released Rs. 40 lakhs to the petitioner/ claimant. And a further sum of Rs. 20 lakhs post our order dated May 20, 2025 and thereafter Rs.3,62,024/-. Therefore, the compensation, in terms of the agreement (ibid) has since been disbursed to the petitioner/ land owner. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a bare analysis of the order and judgment dated April 10, 2023, shows that the authorities were directed to disburse the compensation as per the agreement within a period of two months failing which the petitioner was to be paid penal interest @ 6% till the date of payment. Concededly, since the entire compensation was not paid within the stipulated time, therefore, in terms of the decision of the Coordinate Bench, the petitioner is entitled to payment of interest as well. 3. As would be material to point out paragraph-6 of the response submitted by the respondent authorities, in compliance to our order dated April 16, 2025, reveals; “6.that in pursuance to the order dated 10.04.2023, an amount of approximately Rs.2.15 lacs have been calculated as interest wherein the same amount has been kept in the UT—Capex Plan 2025-26 alogwith some other cases and wherein a communication has already been made with the Director School Education Kashmir by the respondent (Chief Education Officer, Budgam) vide No. CEOB/Plg/2025/2026 dated 02.05.2025 with the request to take further and necessary action at an earliest. The copies of communication dated 02.05.2025 are enclosed herewith as Annexure-I.” 4. Meaning thereby there is no dispute that the authorities are obliged to pay interest to the petitioner for the delayed payment in terms of the decision of this Court dated April 10, 2023 (ibid) apparently, the petitioner is a victim of inaction/ indecision of the authorities. 5. At this stage, Mr. Illyas Nazir Laway, GA and Mr. Faheem Nissar Shah, GA, prays for a pass over to seek instructions. 6. As indicated earlier, the matter was passed over on the request of the learned counsel for the respondents. And is taken up again on request. Mr. Ilyas Nazir Laway, learned counsel for the respondents on instructions from the respondent No.3, who is present in person, submits Rs. 1.25 lakhs is being released today itself by the intending Department (Department of Education) and the balance, if any, shall also be released within a week. 7. That being so, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that nothing substantive survives in the petition and same be disposed of in terms of the statement made by the respondents. 8. Ordered accordingly. (RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Srinagar 30.07.2025 Abdul Qayoom, Secy.