Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Robkar vs Sanjeev Verma on 21 August, 2024
Author: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Bench: Wasim Sadiq Nargal
Serial No. 129
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
ROBSW 4/2024 in CCP(S) 363/2022
c/w CCP(S) 363/2022
ROBKAR
.... Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. J.I.Balwan, Adv. vice Mr. Z.A.Shah, Sr. Adv.
V/s
Sanjeev Verma, Commissioner/Secretary
GAD Jammu.
.....Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG with Ms. Priyanka Bhat, Assisting
Counsel
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
21.08.2024
1. Ms. Kohli, Ld. Sr. AAG submits that she has filed response to the affidavit filed by the petitioner before the Registry today, however, the same is not traceable. Registry is directed to trace out the same and after scanning, attach it with the file.
2. This Court vide order dated 06.08.2024 has directed the learned counsel for the petitioner to file an affidavit within one week, highlighting the consequential benefits, which till date, have not been given to the petitioner in conformity with the order/judgment dated 07.02.2017 passed by the Learned Single Judge in SWP No.2140/2015, which has been upheld by the Apex Court.
3. Subject to the filing of the said affidavit, Ms. Monika Kohli, Learned Sr. AAG appearing on behalf of the respondent/contemnor was directed to ensure the compliance of the same by or before next date of hearing positively, failing which it was observed that the respondent/contemnor Mr. Sanjeev Verma Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. G.A.D Jammu, was directed to remain present on the date fixed.
4. Mr. J.I.Balwan, Adv. appearing vice Mr. Z.A.Shah, Sr. Advocate submits that pursuant to the order dated 06.08.2024, affidavit has been filed and response to the same has also been filed on behalf of the respondent/contemnor. However, the learned counsel submits that the order/judgment passed by this court has not been complied with and the consequential benefits which have been highlighted in the aforesaid affidavit, have not been given to the petitioner. The reply so filed is not on record, thus, this court is not in a position to form an opinion whether the consequential benefits have been given to the petitioner or not.
5. Since there was a specific direction by this court to Mr. Sanjeev Verma, Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. G.A.D, Civil Secretariat Jammu, to appear in person in case the consequential benefits, which have been projected in the affidavit, are not given to the petitioner and this court has not been apprised whether the order has been complied with in its letter and spirit. However, as per the Learned Counsel for the petitioner, the order dated 06.08.2024 passed by this Court has not been complied with and consequential benefits the details of which finds mention in the affidavit, have not been given to the petitioner.
6. Even the respondent/contemnor is not present, instead has filed an application seeking permission of this Court to appear virtually. However, on perusal of the application so filed, this court is of the view that no specific reason has been spelt out for not appearing in person before the Court, as such, the request for appearing virtually, is rejected.
7. The respondent/contemnor, however, has neither appeared in person nor virtually which speaks volumes of his conduct and respect for the orders passed by this Court.
8. Therefore, the respondent/contemnor Mr. Sanjeev Verma, Commissioner/Secretary to Govt. G.A.D Civil Secretariat Jammu, is directed to appear in person physically on the next date of hearing and also to explain the reasons for not complying the order dated 06.08.2024 passed by this Court, by way of filing an affidavit. Let the affidavit be filed by or before the next date of hearing.
9. The proceedings in the instant Robkar are deferred for the time being.
10. List this matter on 02.09.2024.
(Wasim Sadiq Nargal) Judge Jammu:
21.08.2024 "G. Nabi/Secy"