Disposed¶08

Charanjit Singh and Others v. Rahul Yadav Deputy Commissioner Kathua

J&K HC14 Nov 2025CCP(S)/229/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CCP(S) 229/2021 in OWP 55/2017, J&K and Ladakh HC at Jammu, Moksha Khajuria Kazmi J, order dated 14.11.2025 — compliance/contempt closure; enforcement of disposal order dated 26.12.2018 (land compensation Award; additional amount per Circular dated 15.12.1981); bills Rs. 7,48,609 (30.10.2025) and Rs. 1,49,722 (13.11.2025) submitted to District Treasury Officer Kathua; deceased claimant Sheela Devi, legal heir certificate via Surishta Kumari; compliance report taken on record; contempt proceedings closed with liberty to challenge respondents' action; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings closed, with liberty reserved to the petitioners to challenge the action of the respondents if cause survives. ¶08

Charanjit Singh and Others Vs Rahul Yadav Deputy Commissioner Kathua — J&K HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt proceedings closed, with liberty reserved to the petitioners to challenge the action of the respondents if cause survives.

¶08

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents have complied with this Court's order dated 26.12.2018 in OWP No. 55/2017, namely payment of the amount payable in terms of the Award and consideration of the additional amount per Circular dated 15.12.1981. +1 more

¶01

Court's answer

The respondents have implemented the order passed by this Court dated 26.12.2018.

¶06

Ratio / Principle

Since the order dated 26.12.2018 stands implemented, nothing survives in this petition for further adjudication.

¶06

Key takeaways

Contempt proceedings are closed; liberty is granted to the petitioners to challenge the action of the respondents, if cause survives.ratio¶07

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt/compliance petition CCP(S) No. 229/2021 (in OWP No. 55/2017, Charanjit Singh v. U.O.I. and Ors.), High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi, J.; oral order pronounced 14.11.2025), arising from alleged non-compliance of the Court's disposal order dated 26.12.2018 directing the respondents to pay the amount payable in terms of the Award and to consider payment of additional amount if the petitioners satisfied the conditions in Circular dated 15.12.1981. On the compliance report filed 14.11.2025 recording generation of bills of Rs. 7,48,609/- (dated 30.10.2025) and Rs. 1,49,722/- (dated 13.11.2025, share of deceased claimant Sheela Devi upon submission of legal heir certificate), both submitted to the District Treasury Officer, Kathua for land compensation, and petitioner's counsel conceding compliance while noting the additional-amount claim was not considered, the Court held that the respondents had implemented the order dated 26.12.2018, that nothing survived for further adjudication, closed the contempt proceedings, and granted the petitioners liberty to challenge the respondents' action if cause survives. Petition disposed of.

¶1

Sr. No. 04

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU

¶3

CCP(S) No. 229/2021 in Pronounced on:- 14.11.2025 OWP No. 55/2017 Uploaded on:- 17.11.2025 Charanjit Singh and Ors. .....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)

¶4

Through :- Mr. Jagpaul Singh, Advocate.

¶5

v/s

¶6

Rahul Yadav Deputy Commissioner Kathua .....Respondent(s)

¶7

Through :- Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG.

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE

¶9

ORDER (Oral)

¶10

01. By this petition, petitioners herein have alleged non-compliance of order passed by this Court dated 26.12.2018 in OF JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT OWP No. 55/2017 titled “ Charanjit Singh v. U.O.I. and Ors AND LADAKH .”, whereby the petition has been disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pay not only the amount, which is payable to the petitioners in terms of the Award, but also consider the payment of such additional amount if petitioners satisfy the conditions as prescribed in Circular dated 15.12.1981.

¶11

02. Statement of facts stands filed by the respondent.

¶12

03. Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate appearing vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG states that she has filed compliance report before this Court today i.e., 14.11.2025. She has also passed on a copy of the compliance report, which is taken on record. It is stated that respondent has generated bill No. 2J00KTHREV00061025WDC0156 dated 30.10.2025 amounting to Rs. 7,48,609/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Forty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Nine Only) which has already been submitted to the District Treasury Officer, Kathua for further payment of land compensation in favour of rightful claimants.

¶13

04. It is further stated that the remaining amount of Rs. 1,49,722/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Nine Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Two only), which is the share of Smt. Sheela Devi D/o Harnam Singh, who had expired on 01.06.2016, the Legal Hier Certificate of deceased namely Sheela Devi has been submitted by Surishta Kumari D/o Sheela Devi on 13.11.2025 in the office of the respondent. Accordingly, the bill has been generated on 13.11.2025 amounting to Rs. 1,49,722/- which has been submitted to the District Treasury Officer, Kathua for further payment of land compensation in favour of the rightful claimants.

¶14

05. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the order passed by this Court 26.12.2018 has been complied with, however, respondent has not considered the claim of the petitioners for payment of additional

¶15

amount. OF JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT

¶16

06. Since, respondents have implemented the order passed by this Court AND LADAKH dated 26.12.2018, nothing survives in this petition for further adjudication.

¶17

07. Accordingly, contempt proceedings are closed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to challenge the action of the respondents, if cause survives.

¶18

08. Disposed of .

¶19

(Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge

¶20

JAMMU

¶21

14.11.2025 Sushant

¶22

CCP(S) No. 229/2021 in OWP No. 55/2017 Page No. 2

Charanjit Singh and Others v. Rahul Yadav Deputy Commissioner Kathua

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Charanjit Singh and Others v. Rahul Yadav Deputy Commissioner Kathua

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajit Kumar Sharma Vs Commissioner Secretary to Govt Housing and Urban Development J and K Ut Jammu and Another

Ram Lal and Anr. Vs State Th.Special Tribunal and Ors.

Ved Parkash Vs U T of J and K Th Secretary Revenue Deptt and Others

M/S Kohli Construction Th Proprietor Mohd Munshi Vs Ut of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary to Govt. Power Development Department and Others

Krishna Kumari and Others Vs Ut of J and K Th Commissioner Secretary Revenue Deptt and Another

Pushpa Devi Vs Union of India Th Secretary to Govt. Govt. of India Deptt of Aadhar and Another