Chander Kanta v. Shaleen Kabra Financial Commissioner Revenue and Others

ORDER

07.10.2025

¶01The instant contempt petition arises out of an order/judgment dated

09.09.2021 passed by this Court in OWP No. 282/2018 by virtue of which, the writ petition preferred by the petitioner was disposed of with a direction to respondent Nos. 4 to 6 to consider and decide the representations of the petitioner with regard to her entitlement and if found genuine, the amount be released in favour of the eligible claimant. The appropriate decision was required to be taken within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of the order along with complete set of paper book were made available to the respondents.

¶02Since the aforesaid order was not complied with within the time granted by this Court, the instant contempt petition was preferred in which notice was issued on 30.05.2022.

¶03Learned counsel for the respondents submits that she has filed detailed compliance report on 26.03.2025 in the instant contempt petition and has also placed on record the consideration order dated 22.03.2025 in conformity with the direction passed by the writ Court.

Sr. No. 6 2 | P a g e CCP(S) No. 153/2012 IN

OWP No. 282/2018

¶04A further stand has been taken by the respondents in the compliance report to the effect that since the direction was specific only to the extent of according consideration to the representation alleged to have been filed by the petitioner, the same has been done and the said representation was found to be devoid of any merit and, accordingly, rejected for the reason that, as per the record, it has come to fore that one Shri Bahu Ram has challenged the inheritance mutation No. 313 attested in favour of the petitioner by Tehsildar R.S. Pura by way of filing an appeal before the Joint Commissioner Agrarian Reforms, Jammu and the said Court has already granted status-quo in respect of the land in question, which fact has not been mentioned by the petitioner in a writ petition decided by the learned writ Court. However, the said fact was brought to the notice of the respondents while considering the representation.

¶05Since there was a status-quo order passed by Joint Commissioner Agrarian Reforms, Jammu and the said case was pending before the said Court, the rental compensation in favour of the petitioner could not be released, as such, in the aforesaid backdrop, the representation preferred by the petitioner was rejected in respect of the aforesaid manner.

¶06Thus, in light of the stand taken by respondents and also in light of detailed consideration order passed by Deputy Commissioner, Jammu, nothing survives in the instant contempt petition and, accordingly, the proceedings in the instant contempt petition are closed. Rule, if any, shall stand discharged.

¶07Disposed of, accordingly.

(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL)

JUDGE

JAMMU

07.10.2025 Mihul

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case: CCP(S) No. 153/2022 IN OWP No. 282/2018 Chander Kanta ..... Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through :- None. Vs Shaleen Kabra Financial Commissioner Revenue and Ors. .....Respondent(s) Through :- Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE