Sanjeev Verma(Coomr/Secty) v. Romysa Tabasum and Ors

Sr. No. 44 Supp. List

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND ADAKH

LPA No. 342/2024 Sanjeev Verma Mr. Ilyas Nazir, GA vice Mr. Mohsin Qadri, Sr. AAG Romysa Tabasum and others Mr. Mir Manzoor, Advocate

Atul Sreedharan-J (Oral):

¶1The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 20.11.2024 passed in CPSW No. 937/2015. It is disheartening that a contempt petition should be pending before this Court for nine years. The relief was granted to the respondent No. 1 herein vide order dated 04.09.2015. It was the case where the respondent No. 1 herein (original petitioner before the learned Single Judge) had filed a writ petition seeking consideration for compassionate appointment. That petition was disposed of vide order dated 04.09.2015. Paragraph No. 5 of the said order deserves to be reproduced in toto: "In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the Education Department to send the proposal to the Government General Administration Department seeking relaxation of age in terms of Rule 5 of SRO 283 of 1991 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on receipt of the same, the Government General Administration Department is directed to consider the same and pass orders within eight weeks therefrom".

¶2Thereafter, as the said order was not complied with in letter and spirit by the appellant herein, a contempt petition came to be filed in the year 2015. Since then, as stated earlier also hereinabove, the said contempt petition has been pending for nine years. In several cases, this Court finds that this Court itself is responsible for the malady of

the litigants who having got a favorable order from this Court are unable to get the same enforced for years on end.

¶3By the impugned order dated 20.11.2024, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the writ court had gone beyond the scope of original order passed in the writ petition.

¶4Having gone through the same, this Court is of the opinion that the learned Single Judge in the contempt case by the said order has remained well within the presence of the original order of 2015. The order passed in the writ petition directs the Education Department to send a proposal to the Government General Administrative Department (GAD), seeking relaxation of age of the respondent No. 1 herein in terms of Rule 5 of SRO 283 of 1991. The said Rule 5 reads as hereunder: "Authority to relax age and qualification:- the Government in the General Administration Department may relax the lower or upper age limits or educational qualification, as the case may be, in deserving cases."

¶6The said provision gives unbridled power to the appellant herein to relax the age in deserving cases. That was already considered by the learned Single Judge here in the writ petition vide order dated

04.09.2015. The impugned order herein does not transgress the original order of 2015.

¶7Under the circumstances, this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the impugned order dated 20.11.2024 and accordingly the appeal is dismissed.

Sr. No. 34 Regular List

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

LPA No. 234/2023 c/w WP (C) No. 2581/2023 Mohammad Ramzan Bhat and another Mr. Hakim Suhail Ishtiaq, Advocate UT of JK and others None

At request matter is taken out of turn. Due to paucity of time, the matter could not be considered. Under the circumstances, list again on 19.12.2024, higher up.

Sr. No. 42 Regular List

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

WP(C) no. 2455/2024 M/S New King Plus Industries Mr. Malik Faraz, Advocate UT of JK and others None

At request matter is taken out of turn. Due to paucity of time, the matter could not be considered. Under the circumstances, list on 19.12.2024.