Harpal Singh vs Rahul Yadav on 23 December, 2024

0
98

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Harpal Singh vs Rahul Yadav on 23 December, 2024

Author: Puneet Gupta

Bench: Puneet Gupta

                                                                     S. No. 34



         HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                         AT JAMMU

Case:-     CCP(D) No. 40/2024


1. Harpal Singh, age 44 years S/o Jagjit Singh,
2. Sunbir Kour, age 47 years, D/o Jagjit Singh,
3. Manmohan Kour, Age 77 years W/o Jagjit Singh,
   All R/o 488-A, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu                            .....Petitioner(s)

                   Through: Mr. S K Bhat, Advocate

               Vs
1. Rahul Yadav,
   Municipal Commissioner, JMC, Jammu
2. Smt. Rimpy Ohri,
   Joint Commissioner (Adm), (BOCA),
   Jammu Municipal Corporation, Jammu                          ..... Respondent(s)

                   Through: Mr. Rajnish Raina, Advocate

           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
Coram:
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PUNEET GUPTA, JUDGE

                                    ORDER

(23.12.2024)

01. This is the petition for initiating contempt proceedings for willful

disobedience and non-compliance of the judgment dated 27.03.2024 passed

by this Court in CCP(D) No. 9/2023 titled “Harpal Singh & Ors vs Rahul

Yadav & Anr“, whereby the respondents were directed to treat the

application of the petitioners as representation and decide the same within

two weeks.

02. Mr. Rajnish Raina, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits

that in compliance to the judgment, the respondents have considered the

representation of the petitioners afresh and have passed a speaking order

vide Order No. 155 of 2024 dated 23.11.2024, whereby the claim of the
2 CCP(D) No. 40/2024

petitioners has been found devoid of any merit and rejected.

03. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the

respondents and a copy of the government speaking order placed on record,

the judgment passed by this Court stands complied with. There remains

nothing for adjudication in this contempt petition. The contempt petition is,

therefore, dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to work out their remedy

against the speaking order in accordance with law.

                                       (PUNEET GUPTA)                 (SANJEEV KUMAR)
                                            JUDGE                           JUDGE
             JAMMU
             23.12.2024
             Vijay




Vijay Kumar
2024.12.24 10:05
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here