Ashok Kumar Sadhotra vs Rohit Kansal
2023 Latest Caselaw 2335 j&K

                                                                 Serial No. 29


     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT JAMMU
Case:-      CCP(S) No. 367/2019

Ashok Kumar Sadhotra                                    .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)

                          Through: Mr. Narinder Kumar Attri, Advocate.

                     Vs

Rohit Kansal, Secy. Estates Deptt. and another                    ..... Respondent(s)

                          Through: Mr. K. D. S. Kotwal, Advocate.

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE

                                        ORDER

(18.10.2023)

1. In the instant contempt petition, the petitioner has complained

disobedience of the judgment dated 24.09.2018 passed in SWP No. 1501/2014 by

the respondents/contemnors.

2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the judgment (supra) stands

upheld by the Division Bench as well after being thrown challenge to by the

respondents/contemnors in an LPA which came to be dismissed on 04.02.2019.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that a time

barred review petition filed by the respondents/contemnors as well came to be

dismissed by the Division Bench on 27.03.2023 and that yet the

respondents/contemnors have not implemented the judgment dated 24.09.2018 and

continue to withhold an amount of interest accrued on the amount of gratuity of the

petitioner.

4. Statement of facts has been filed by the respondents/contemnors wherein

the fact of dismissal of the LPA as also filing of a time barred review petition is

admitted.

5. However, it has been stated that a sanction for filing of the Special

Leave Petition has been granted by the Department of Law and Justice of

Parliament Affairs in the matter, as such, have prayed for deferring the

consideration of the contempt petition.

6. Law is no more res integra that filing of an appeal against a judgment

does not ipso facto operate as stay of the judgment. The respondents, thus, cannot

in law avoid implementation of the judgment merely on the ground that filing of

the Special Leave Petition has been sanctioned. Such an approach by the

respondents/contemnors ex-facie is uncalled and unwarranted besides being a

prima facie contempt of the Court committed by them necessitating taking of the

coercive measures against the respondents/contemnors.

7. However, before proceeding to undertake such coercive measures

against the respondents/contemnors, in the interest of justice, yet another

opportunity of four weeks, as last and final opportunity, is granted to the

respondents/contemnors to comply with the judgment dated 29.09.2018, failing

which appropriate orders shall follow.

8. List on 29.11.2023.

(JAVED IQBAL WANI) JUDGE

JAMMU 18.10.2023 Shivalee