This is a contempt petition filed alleging violation of astay order. The Court held that since the impugned order was only stayed and no direction was issued, the act of construction did not violate any order. The contempt petition was dismissed as misconceived.
Contempt petition for initiation of proceedings against respondents is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
S. No. 110
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR (Through Video Conference)
CM No. 4200/2020 in CCP (S) No. 274/2020
Abdul Hamid Ganie.
...Petitioners(s)
Through :- Mr. T. A. Lone, Advocate (on video call)
V/s
Asha Begum and ors.
.....Respondent (s)
Through :-
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
(through Video Conference from residence in Jammu)
ORDER
07.10.2020
CM No. 4200/2020
The instant application has been filed by the petitioner seeking extension of time for filing the affidavit, stamp and court fee etc in support of the petition.
For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. The petitioner shall do the needful within a period of three days, when the normal functioning of the Courts begins.
Application is, accordingly, disposed of.
CCP(S) No. 274/2020
Vide order dated 09.12.2019 passed in CM(M) No. 54/2019, the operation of the order dated 08.11.2018 passed by the Chairman, DLSA, Kupwara was stayed. The present contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner, thereby stating that there is violation of order dated 09.12.2019 passed by this Court (supra). It is further stated that the contemnor No. 1 along with
CCP (S) No. 274/2020
2
other contemnors during night hours on war footing basis constructed the RCC Wall, encroached the road and brazenly violated the order of this Court.
A perusal of the order dated 09.12.2019 reveals that this Court had
simply stayed the operation of the impugned order and no further direction was issued by this Court.
Without commenting upon the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner, the present contempt petition is misconceived as prima facie , there is no violation of the order passed by this Court.
The remedy availed by the petitioner is misconceived, as such, the present contempt petition for initiation of contempt proceedings against the
respondents, is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail the remedy as per law.
(RAJNESH OSWAL)
JUDGE
JAMMU 07.10.2020 Rakesh
Whether the order is speaking: Yes/No
Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No
RAKESH KUMAR 2020.10.08 11:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the construction of an RCC wall violates the order of this Court staying the operation of an impugned order.
Whether the present contempt petition for initiation of contempt proceedings is maintainable.
Abdul Hamid Ganie
Asha Begum
Rajnesh Oswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
