Abdul Hamid vs Delip Bakshi And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 264 j&K

                                                                Sr. No. 217



                HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
                           AT JAMMU

                                                        CPOWP No. 91/2010


Abdul Hamid                                             .... Petitioner/Appellant(s)


                                  Through:-      Mr. Bari Abdullah, Advocate.

                            V/s

Delip Bakshi and others                                         .....Respondent(s)

                                  Through:-      None

Coram :     HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE

                                      ORDER

1. This contempt petition has been filed for non-compliance of the

judgment/order dated 04.06.2009 vide which a direction was issued to the

respondents to treat the petition as representation and consider the case for

payment of compensation as well as providing him of job if found eligible.

2. The respondents in compliance to the order of this court have considered

the case of the petitioner vide order No. PHEJ/Legal/12911-15 dated 24.11.2012

and have held as follows:

"Now, therefore in compliance to the direction passed by the Hon'ble High Court, the claim of the petitioner has been considered and so far claim for appointment is concerned, same is hereby rejected being not covered under law. So far as claim for compensation is concerned, petition is held entitled to compensation of 5 marlas of land subject to verification of title. The Assistant Commissioner (Collector Land Acquisition) Ramban was requested by Executive Engineer PHE Division Doda vide letter No.PHED/7059-63 dated 17.02.2012 to acquire the said land. Hence uploading the claim of petitioner for compensation and the claim of petitioner for appointment is rejected."

2 CPOWP no.91/2010

3. In view of the above, judgment/order dated 04.06.2009 stands complied

with. Proceedings in this contempt petition stand closed. The petitioner however

is free to assail the order if he so desires.

(Sindhu Sharma) Judge JAMMU 09.03.2021 Raj kumar

Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No

RAJ KUMAR 2021.03.15 09:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document