Contempt petition alleging non-compliance of a 2018 writ direction to clear undisputed liabilities. Both sides stated at Bar that the admitted liability was released in January 2025. The Court held nothing remained for adjudication and closed the proceedings.
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.
Sr. No. 86
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
CCP (S) No. 442/2019 in OWP No. 1275/2018
Bharat Bushan Khajuria
.....Applicant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through :- Mr. Raghav Sawney, Advocate
v/s
Ajeet Kumar Sahu, Secy. Public Health Engineering (PHE) and Ors.
.....Respondent(s)
Through :- Ms. Chetna Manhas, Advocate vice Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE
ORDER 15.12.2025
By this petition, the petitioner herein has alleged non-compliance of
the order passed by this Court on 07.07.2018, whereby the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to clear the undisputed liabilities
towards the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the parties have stated at Bar that the admitted
liability due to the petitioner has already been released in his favour in January, 2025.
In view of the above, nothing remains to be adjudicated in the contempt petition, as such, the proceedings in the instant petition are closed.
(Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge JAMMU 15.12.2025 Manik
1 issue framed by the court
Whether contempt proceedings survive when the admitted liability under the writ direction has already been released to the petitioner?
Bharat Bushan Khajuria
Ajeet Kumar Sahu, Secy. Public Health Engineering (PHE)
Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
