Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Abdul Hamid Gojar And Another vs Deepika Kumari Sharma And Others (Jal ... on 18 February, 2025
Serial No. 2
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
...
CCP(S) No. 434/2023 in WP(C) No. 1605/2023.
Abdul Hamid Gojar and another
.........Petitioner(s)
Through:
Mr. Lone Altaf, Advocate
Versus
Deepika Kumari Sharma and others (Jal Shakti Department).
......Respondent(s)
Through:
Mr. Mubashir Majid, Dy. AG
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE
ORDER
18.02.2025
The instant contempt petition stands filed by the petitioners in October
2023 pursuant to the allegations of the observation in breach of the judgment
dated 24.06.2023 of this Court passed in WP(C) No. 1605/2023. In the earlier
compliance report dated 30.12.2023, reference of which has been made in the
order dated 24.05.2024, the respondents as per Para-5 of the compliance report
submitted that the works in question was executed in the year 2017-2018,
however, without accord of administrative approval which is not coming under
the modalities as laid down in the circular instructions bearing No. A/40/217-492
dated 24.04.2021 for processing of past liabilities in respect of the work in
question. It was further submitted that the claims of the petitioners are being
scrutinized in the light of the circular issued by the Government vide
communication dated 05.12.2023. Thus, as per the said earlier compliance report
dated 30.12.2023, the respondents admitted the allotment as well as the
execution of the works in question by the petitioners for which they have not
been paid for want of some codal formalities as per the latest Government
instructions in vogue.
Through the fresh compliance report dated 11.10.2024, the respondents
have rejected the claim of the petitioners on account of the non-completion of
some codal formalities required as regards the release of past liabilities.
Reading the two compliance reports dated 30.12.2023 and 11.10.2024
in juxtaposition it is discernible that the respondents are intentionally
observing the judgment of this Court dated 26.06.2023 in utter breach. The
petitioners being the contractors have hurried to execute the works assigned to
them by the respondent's way back in the years 2017-2018 and petitioner no.
1 has admittedly been paid some portion of the due amount.
Once the respondents have got the works in question executed by the
petitioners, they cannot under law be permitted to deny the payment to them
on account of non-completion of some codal formalities. The respondents and
not the petitioners are responsible for observing the codal formalities, if any,
applicable in case because they (respondents) should not have under the
directions of the Government orders allotted the works in question without
complying with the requisite formalities. It will be a great injustice to the
petitioners to deny them their legitimate payments for want of the release of
which they are supposed to have been suffering badly.
The respondents are under a legal obligation to make due payments to
the petitioners against the works executed by them.
This is a fit case which deserves the framing of Rule against the
respondents, however, this Court in the ends of justice feel convinced to give
a last opportunity to the respondents to comply with the judgment of this
Court dated 26.06.2023 in letter and spirit. In case the respondents are
satisfied that the petitioners have executed the works in question, the
payments against the said works are meant to be made to them in relaxation
of the pre-execution codal formalities.
The respondents are directed to file the fresh compliance report
positively by the next date of hearing.
Copies of this order shall be forwarded to the respondents/contemnors
forthwith for compliance.
List on 19.03.2025.
(MOHAMMAD YOUSUF WANI)
JUDGE
Srinagar
18.02.2025
"Shaista-PS"
