This order closes a contempt petition where the High Court found compliance with a previous directed order dated 10 August 2026. The court closed the proceedings without elaboration, directing the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy if needed.
Proceedings in the contempt petition are closed.
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. 27 Regular List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
CCP(S) No. 53/2025
Fatima and Ors.
…Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Bilal Ahmad Khan, Adv.
Vs.
Rayees Abdullah
...Respondent(s)
Through: Ms Raheela Khan, AC vice Mr. Ab. Rashid Malik. Sr. AAG.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE. ORDER
01.09.2026
01. In terms of Order dated 27th June, 2024, which is the subject matter of the present contempt petition, the Writ Court directed the writ petition be treated as representation and respondents were further directed to decide the same within a period of six weeks from the date copy of order along with writ petition and enclosed annexure were to be made available to them.
02. Compliance report stands filed along with Order dated 10th August, 2026.
03. In view of the above, the proceedings in the instant contempt petition are closed, leaving the petitioner free to available appropriate remedy under law.
(RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE
SRINAGAR:
01.09.2026
“ Shamim Dar ”
Fatima (and Ors.)
Rayees Abdullah
Rajneesh Oswal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
