HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CCP(S) 33/2026 in [WP(C) 3024/2025] CM (975/2026). Atul Sharma. …Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Mudasir Bin Hassan, Advocate. VERSUS PC Meena And Others. …Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Yasmeen Jan, Assisting Counsel vice Mr. T. M. Shamsi, DSGI. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAHUL BHARTI, JUDGE. ORDER 04.03.2026 01. The petitioner had come to petition this Court by way of writ petition- WP(C) No. 3024/2025. 02. Upon very institution of the writ petition, the counsel for the petitioner self-invited the disposal of the writ petition without bothering about its adjudication on merits but seeking a direction from this Court unto the writ respondents to treat said writ petition as a representation from the end of the petitioner for consideration of the writ respondents to come up with an appropriate decision in accordance with law. 03. This Court accordingly disposed of writ petition by directing the writ respondents to treat the writ petition as a representation and take a call within a period of two months from the date of furnishing of a copy of the order along with copy of the writ petition. 04. In said writ petition, the petitioner had named five respondents. 02 Regular 05. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at the time of seeking disposal of the writ petition on the lines referred to hereinabove, did not specify as to which particular respondent out of array of respondents was supposed to take a call, otherwise, going by number of the writ respondents, the direction would mean that all the five respondents were supposed to take call for consideration jointly as well as severally. 06. The petitioner has now come up with present contempt petition filed on 27.02.2026, complaining that the needful exercise as envisaged in terms of order dated 05.12.2025 passed by this Court in WP(C) No. 3024/2025 has not been done, thereby rendering four respondents named in the contempt petition liable for acting in violation and breach of the writ court direction. 07. This Court, by virtue of an order dated 20.02.2026, called upon the petitioner to demonstrate as to when and how he came to submit the writ petition along with court order for the consideration of the respondents. 08. The petitioner has come up with CM No. 975/2026 thereby aiming to place on record the evidence of the fact that he acted in compliance with the direction as given by this Court in order dated 05.12.2025. 09. This Court, however, is not convinced that the petitioner actually acted in compliance with the direction given by this Court, which meant that each and every writ respondent was to be individually notified with respect to the copy of the order dated 05.12.2025 along with the copy of the writ petition and the annexures thereto. 10. Unless and until the petitioner comes up with the compliance in the due manner, the petitioner does not have a cause to come forward with the present contempt petition. 11. Accordingly, the present contempt petition is dismissed, leaving the petitioner free to act in letter and spirit compliance with the direction of this Court contained in order dated 05.12.2025 by properly addressing the copy of the said order along with the writ petition and the annexures thereto to each and every writ respondent and thereafter upon expiry of the period given in the event of non-compliance at the end of the respondents to maintain the contempt petition. (RAHUL BHARTI) JUDGE SRINAGAR 04.03.2026 Bisma Jan.