Sirmeena Banoo vs Vikas Sharma Dy. Comm. Doda And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2019 j&K

                                                                     Sr.No. 51


               HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                             AT JAMMU

                                                      CPSW No. 472/2017

Sirmeena Banoo                                                       .... Petitioner(s)

                    Through :- Mr. I.H. Bhat, Advocate with
                               Mr. Akeel Wani, Advocate.
         V/s

Vikas Sharma Dy. Comm. Doda and Ors.                              .... Respondent(s)


                    Through :- Mr. Arjun Pandoh, Advocate vice
                               Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG for R-1
                               Mr. A.V. Singh, Advocate vice
                               Mr. R.S. Jamwal, AAG for R-2.
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

                                      ORDER

20.12.2022 This Court vide order dated 23.11.2022 extended the time by four weeks in favour of the respondents to file compliance report, subject to cost of Rs 1,000/- to be deposited in the Advocates' Welfare Fund. Besides, it was directed that in case, the compliance report is not filed, respondent No. 2 shall appear in person.

However, in pursuant to the aforesaid order, the compliance report has been filed on behalf of the respondents, supported with an affidavit sworn by the Block Development Officer, Rural Development Department, Jammu.

Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that the costs have already been deposited vide receipt No. 1497 dated 14.12.2022 with the Registry of this Court by the Rural Development Department but the same is not on record of the present file. Registry to trace the same and after scanning to the digital file, place the same on record of the present file.

I have perused the statement of facts filed by the respondents and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Respondents have taken the specific stand in the aforesaid statement of facts that the respondents in compliance to the direction passed by this Court requested the Deputy Commissioner, Doda to consider the case of the petitioner

CPSW No. 472/2017

in the light of order dated 16.11.2015 and in terms of SRO-43 of 1994. Pursuant thereto, the respondents have issued a reminder to the Deputy Commissioner, Doda to share the action taken report but till date, nothing has been done on behalf of the Deputy Commissioner, Doda and the order/judgment till date has not been complied with in its letter and spirit.

The aforesaid reply has been field by respondent No. 2. This Court vide order/judgment dated 16.11.2015 has directed the respondents to accord consideration to the relief sought by the petitioner and, accordingly, it was incumbent on part of the respondents to have taken the final decision thereon in accordance with the applicable rules.

Although the aforesaid direction came to be passed by this Court way back on 16.11.2015 but till date the respondents have chosen not to comply with the same in its letter and spirit and are delaying the matter without any reasonable cause.

However, in the interest of justice, one last and final opportunity is given to the respondents to comply with the aforesaid order/judgment in its letter and spirit by passing a detailed speaking order with the copy in advance to the learned counsel for the petitioner, who may respond to the same within two weeks thereafter. It is made clear that in case the compliance report is not filed within aforesaid period, respondent Nos. 1 & 2 shall appear in person.

List on 20.02.2023.

(Wasim Sadiq Nargal) Judge

Jammu:

20.12.2022 Neha-1