Raman Arora vs Dr. Harsh Kumar Bhanwala And
2022 Latest Caselaw 165 j&K

                                                                      Sr. No. 43



      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                       AT JAMMU
                              Through virtual mode
                                                CPSW No. 512/2018
Raman Arora
                                                                ....petitioner(s)

                 Through :- None


Dr. Harsh Kumar Bhanwala and
another
                                                             ....Respondent(s)

                Through :-   Mr. Ajay Abrol Advocate.

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE

                                    ORDER

1 This is a petition for initiating contempt proceedings against the

respondents for willful disobedience and non-compliance of judgment dated

15.11.2017 passed in SWP No.1240/2017 whereby a direction was issued to the

Appellate Authority to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner afresh

and pass a speaking order in accordance with law.

2 Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that in

compliance to the judgment passed by this Court, the Appellate Authority vide

its order dated 15.06.2018 reconsidered the matter after affording an opportunity

of being heard to the petitioner and found the same devoid of merit. It is

submitted that the Appellate Authority found the penalty of dismissal

commensurate to the misconduct committed by the petitioner and, accordingly

found him not eligible for voluntary retirement. It is further submitted that

feeling aggrieved by order dated 15.06.2018 (supra), the petitioner has filed

SWP No.647/2019 and has prayed for quashing of the said order. Learned

counsel, therefore, submits that in view of the petitioner having availed of

remedy against the consideration order, no case for initiating contempt

proceedings against the respondents is made out.

3 Having heard learned counsel for the respondents and gone through

the contempt petition and the judgment of which the violation is alleged, I am of

the considered view that no case for initiating contempt proceedings against the

respondents is made out. The mandate of direction was for consideration of the

matter by the Appellate Authority after affording an opportunity of being heard

to the petitioner which from the perusal of order dated 15.06.2018 appears to

have been done. The petitioner has rightly worked out his remedy and filed the

writ petition i.e SWP No. 647/2019 to throw challenge to the consideration order

(supra).

4 In view of the above, the proceedings in this contempt petitioner are

closed.

(Sanjeev Kumar) Judge Jammu:

11.02.2022 Sanjeev

Whether order is speaking:Yes