Central Administrative Tribunal - Srinagar
Mohammad Iqbal Rather vs Health And Medical Education ... on 24 February, 2026
ITEM 12 1 TA 48 OF 2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
SRINAGAR BENCH, SRINAGAR
T.A. 48/2023
Heard and Reserved on: 16-02-2026
Pronouncement of Order on: 24-02-2026
CORAM
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE,MEMBER(JUDL.)
1) Mohammad Iqbal Rather
S/o Ali Mohammad Rather
R/o Batmaloo, Srinagar.
......Applicant
By Advocate :
Mr. B A Bhat
Ms. Tabassum Z Zalali
VERSUS
1. State of J &K Chief Secretary Civil Secretariat Pin
code 190001.
2. Director of Health, Kashmir old Secretariat Pin code
190001.
3. Drug Analyst, Drug Laboratory, Govt. of J&K,Dal
gate, Srinagar Pin code
......Respondents
By Advocate :-
Mr.Syed Musaib, DAG
Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
Devendra
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65=
1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone=
236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed
c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER=
4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230
Tripathi
9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30'
ITEM 12 2 TA 48 OF 2023
O R D E R (FINAL)
JUSTICE RITU TAGORE, MEMBER [JUDL.]
01.The present T.A./48/2023 is with regard to the execution of decree dated 30.07.2003 passed in Civil Suit No. 18 of 2001, instituted on 16.05.2001 for Declaration and Mandatory Injunction against the respondents.
02.This execution petition was transferred to this Tribunal pursuant to the order dated 20.10.2021 passed by the Learned Executing Court under Section 29 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
03.Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the matter, as culled out from the records of the execution petition, are that the applicant (the plaintiff before the Learned Trial Court) instituted a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction against the respondents on the ground that his deceased father, namely Ali Mohammad Rather, was the sole breadwinner of the family and was a permanent employee of the respondents' (defendants before the Learned Trial Court) department on the post of a Packer. He died in harness on 25.07.1984, leaving behind his Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 3 TA 48 OF 2023 widow and minor children, including the applicant.
04.The applicant further pleaded that, being eligible under the applicable rules, he submitted an application (Annexure-A1) in August 1984 for his appointment on compassionate grounds in accordance with the relevant rules of SRO-43. The department processed the application vide communication addressed by the Deputy Director, Health Services, bearing endorsement No. Est- 4/IV/3957 dated 25.02.1991 to the Assistant Drug Analyst and other communication No. Est-4-255/2143-44 dated 18.07.1991(Annexure-III & IV) respectively. The requisite documents were also submitted by the applicant as and when he was called upon to do so. However, despite repeated requests, no response was received from the respondents, which constrained the applicant to institute a civil suit for declaration and mandatory injunction against the respondents seeking appointment on compassionate grounds under SRO-43 of 1994.
05.The respondents did not contest the suit and the same was Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 4 TA 48 OF 2023 accordingly decided ex parte on 30.07.2003 (Annexure- V). Upon failure to implement the decree, the applicant instituted an execution petition before the Learned Executing Court. The record reveals that the respondents (judgment debtors) failed to appear in the executing proceedings as well and were proceeded against ex parte.
06.An application filed by Judgment Debtor No. 3 seeking setting aside of the ex parte judgment and decree was rejected vide order dated 21.09.2007 and the respondents were consequently directed to implement the decree dated 30.07.2003 (Annexure-V). Further, by a subsequent order dated 18.10.2012, the Learned Executing Court again directed implementation of the decree, declining to accept the statement of facts filed on behalf of the Under Secretary to Government dated 08.10.2009, wherein they asserted compliance with the decree on the ground that the applicant's claim for appointment on compassionate grounds had been duly considered and rejected.
07.In the interregnum, upon the establishment of the Central Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 5 TA 48 OF 2023 Administrative Tribunal at Jammu and then at Srinagar under the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the execution proceedings stood transferred. Hence, the present proceedings.
08.Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the action of the respondents in rejecting the applicant's claim for appointment on compassionate grounds vide Consideration Order bearing No. 78-HME of 2014 dated 31.01.2014 is contrary to and in sheer violation of the directions contained in the decree dated 30.07.2003, whereby the respondents were directed to consider the applicant's claim for appointment on compassionate grounds in accordance with the applicable rules governing such appointments.
09.Learned Counsel further submits that the applicant's father died in harness on 25.07.1984. At the relevant time, SRO-194 was in force. The applicant, being eligible and fulfilling all requisite conditions prescribed under the applicable rules, applied promptly in August 1984 seeking Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 6 TA 48 OF 2023 appointment on compassionate grounds under SRO-194. Learned Counsel submits that inter se communications (Annexure III & IV) demonstrate that the applicant's case was processed under SRO-194, thereby affirming that the applicable rules at the relevant time were SRO-194.
10.It is further submitted that the applicant fully cooperated with the respondents and furnished all the requisite documents as and when demanded from him to establish his eligibility. It is stated that there is no material on record to indicate any lapse, omission, or fault on the part of the applicant in diligently pursuing his claim.
11.However, it is contended that the respondents unduly delayed the consideration of the matter and ultimately rejected the claim on extraneous grounds by applying the provisions of SRO-43, holding that the applicant did not satisfy the conditions prescribed therein.
12.Learned Counsel submits that, as per the settled position of law, eligibility for compassionate appointment is required to be determined in accordance with the rules in Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 7 TA 48 OF 2023 force on the date when the cause of action arises. In the present case, the cause of action arose in the year 1984 upon the death of the applicant's father and the applicant submitted his application immediately thereafter in August 1984.
13.It is undisputed, according to Learned Counsel, that SRO- 194 was in force at the relevant time and the applicant's case was processed by the department under the said rules. The subsequent rejection of the claim by applying SRO- 43 is wholly illegal and contrary to the settled principles of law. Learned Counsel submitted that it is well settled in a catena of decisions that new rules cannot operate retrospectively so as to extinguish accrued rights under the repealed rules provided there is no acquiescence on the part of the applicant/claimant under the repealed rules and delay in enforcing such right is not attributable to the applicant/claimant. Learned Counsel submits that there was no default on the part of the applicant and he had acquired a right under SRO-194, being eligible. It is stated Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 8 TA 48 OF 2023 that the impugned order rejecting the claim is arbitrary, unsustainable in law and liable to be set aside. In support of these submissions, learned counsel relies upon Kumar Shiv Satya Narayan vs. State of J&K & Others, SWP No. 621/2009, CMA No. 844/2009, decided on 08.02.2013. Accordingly, it is prayed that the respondents be directed to reconsider the applicant's claim in accordance with SRO-194.
14.Per contra, Learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the applicant seeks implementation of the decree dated 30.07.2003, and that the respondents have fully complied with the directions contained therein. The decree directed the respondents' department to consider the applicant's case for appointment on compassionate grounds under SRO-43 in place of his deceased father, subject to his fulfillment of all requisite formalities and provided he was otherwise found eligible.
15.Learned Counsel submits that upon examination of the applicant's case, he was found ineligible for appointment Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 9 TA 48 OF 2023 on compassionate grounds under the rules notified vide SRO-43 on account of lack of requisite qualification. It is submitted that the applicant is only 8th class passed, whereas the prescribed qualification for appointment to a Class IV post is matriculation. The applicant neither improved his qualification within the prescribed period of one year in terms of the provisions of SRO-43, nor fulfilled the eligibility criteria thereafter. The suit came to be filed after a lapse of 11 years from the death of the applicant's father. The claim has become stale, as nearly 20 years have elapsed since the death of the applicant's father. The applicant cannot now be permitted to alter his stand and seek appointment under SRO-194 as the decree specifically mandated consideration of his case under SRO-43 and not under SRO-194. It is submitted that this Tribunal cannot travel beyond the decree, nor issue directions which would amount to modifying or enlarging the scope of the original decree. In support of the aforesaid submissions, reliance is placed on Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 10 TA 48 OF 2023 Commissioner/Secretary to Government, Education Department,J&K & Others vs. Mohd. Amin Waza&Anr., Civil Appeal Nos. 4433-4436 of 2021 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 11316-11319 of 2021), decided on 20 July 2021.
16.Accordingly, it is submitted that since the decree has been complied with in its true letter and spirit, the present execution proceedings deserve to be closed.
17.I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their valuable assistance.
18.There is no dispute that the applicant's father, a permanent employee of the respondent department, died in harness on 25.07.1984. Following his father's death, the applicant submitted an application seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. The department processed the applicant's case under SRO-194 as is evident from communications dated 18.02.1991 and 18.07.1991 respectively (Annexure III and IV).
19.As the record reflects that no progress was made in his Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 11 TA 48 OF 2023 case, the applicant instituted a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction. The suit was decreed ex parte in favour of the applicant on 30.07.2003, and the respondents were directed to consider his case for appointment on compassionate grounds under SRO-43.
For ready reference, the operative part of the decree is reproduced below:
"After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the plaintiff has proved that his father was working in the defendants' department and died in the year 1984 during the tenure of his service. As such, the plaintiff was entitled to be considered for appointment on compassionate grounds under SRO 43. Since no one has come forward to resist the claim of the plaintiff, I am left with no other option but to pass an ex parte decree in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. The suit of the plaintiff is accordingly decreed, and the defendants are directed to consider the case of the plaintiff for appointment on compassionate grounds under SRO 43 in place of his father, after he completes all other formalities and is otherwise found entitled to the same. The office shall prepare a decree sheet accordingly, and the file shall be consigned to the records after its due completion."Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 12 TA 48 OF 2023
20.The applicant now seeks execution of the decree dated 30.07.2003 (Annexure VI) in the present proceedings.
21.It is well settled that a dependent family member of a deceased employee is entitled to consideration for compassionate appointment in accordance with the policy in force on the date of the employee's death. If the policy governing compassionate appointment is subsequently amended or repealed, the dependent retains the right to be considered under the policy prevailing at the time of death. It is equally well established that new rules cannot operate retrospectively to extinguish rights that accrued under the repealed rules, provided there has been no acquiescence, waiver, or abandonment on the part of the claimant and the delay in enforcement is not attributable to him.
22.However, in the present case, the applicant, by instituting a civil suit specifically seeking declaration and consideration for compassionate appointment under SRO-Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi
Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 13 TA 48 OF 2023 43, and by pursuing execution of the decree so obtainedthereunder, hasmade a conscious and unequivocal election of a remedy under SRO-43. This conduct constitutes a clear abandonment of any alleged right under the earlier statutory framework under SRO-194 as applicable at the time of death. The doctrine of election squarely applies, and the applicant cannot approbate and reprobate in the same breath.
23.Moreover, it is a settled principle of law that in execution proceedings, the court/Tribunal cannot travel beyond the decree or enlarge the scope of the directions contained therein, or issue additional directions not contemplated in the decree dated 30.07.2003. Consequently, the submission that the claim should nonetheless be considered under SRO-194 is fundamentally flawed and ex facie unsustainable.
24.The relevant conditions governing the claims under SRO- 43 are reproduced hereunder:
2. Application of Rules These rules shall apply to the compassionate Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 14 TA 48 OF 2023 appointment of a person who is a family member of:--
(i) a Government employee who dies in harness other than due to militancy related action;
(ii) -
(iii) -
(iv) -
(2) Explanation -- For purposes of these rules:
(a) -
(b) -
(c) -
(d) "Family Member" means spouse, son, daughter, adopted son, adopted daughter, sister or brother dependent on the deceased.
3. Appointment under these rules (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any rule or order for the time being in force regulating the procedure for recruitment in any service or post under the Government, an eligible family member of a person specified in rule 2 may be appointed against a vacancy in the lowest rank of non-gazetted service or Class-IV post having qualification as prescribed under the relevant Recruitment Rules:
- Provided that the applicant is eligible and qualified for such post or acquires such eligibility and qualification within a period of one year from the date of death of the deceased person specified in rule 2;
- Provided further that no application for compassionate appointment under these rules shall be entertained after the expiry of one year from the date of death of the deceased person.
(2)-
(3)-
- Provided that if any one among the family members of the deceased civilian fulfills the eligibility criteria prescribed under the aforesaid Rules for appointment into Government service or acquires such eligibility within one year from the date of death of the deceased person, then they shall have the option either to Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 15 TA 48 OF 2023 choose the Government service or the cash compensation.
4. -
5. -
6. -
7. Power to Relax
- The Government may relax the lower or upper age limits or education/technical qualification, as the case may be, in deserving cases.
25.The respondents rejected the applicant's claim on the ground that he did not possess the requisite qualification and was therefore, ineligible under the provisions of SRO-
43. It was further observed that claim has become stale, the death having occurred nearly twenty-eight years ago and rule cannot be applied retrospectively.
26. It is not in dispute that the applicant is qualified only up to 8th standard. The photocopy of the application (Annexure A-II) and school leaving certificate (Annexure-V) also demonstrate this fact. The photocopy of SRO 194 placed on record by applicant prescribes the conditions governing appointment on compassionate grounds, which stipulate that for appointment to a Class IV post, the claimant/applicant must possess at least Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 16 TA 48 OF 2023 matriculation qualification or, if not so qualified, must acquire the same within the prescribed period. The applicant has neither controverted this position nor demonstrated compliance with the eligibility requirementby showing that the requisite qualification under either SRO-194 or SRO-43 was acquired by him within the stipulated period prescribed therein.
Furthermore, claim has been rejected on account of substantial delay. The applicant's father died in 1984 whereas suit was instituted in 2001 after lapse of seventeen years. Law is settled that compassionate appointment cannot be granted after lapse of considerable period where element of urgent financial need no longer survives.
27.As noticed above, the judgment and decree dated 30.07.2003 was a qualified direction, whereby the respondents were directed to consider the applicant's claim for appointment on compassionate grounds under SRO-43 subject to his fulfilling all requisite formalities Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 17 TA 48 OF 2023 and being otherwise found eligible under the governing rules. The decree did not confer an absolute right of appointment but mandated consideration in accordance with the applicable provisions of SRO-43.
28.The order passed by the respondents reflects due consideration of the applicant's case in light of the relevant rules, his admitted qualification, and the aspect of inordinate delay renderingthe claim stale. The decision cannot be said to be arbitrary, illegal, or contrary to the decree. The executing court cannot go beyond the terms of the decree or enlarge its scope. Since the respondents have considered the claim strictly in accordance with the decree and the governing rules, the decree stands duly complied with.
29.In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the discussion made hereinabove, nothing further survives for consideration in the present execution proceedings. The decree stands fully complied with. The execution proceedings standclosed. Consequently, the execution Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30' ITEM 12 18 TA 48 OF 2023 petition is dismissed. All connected applications stand dismissed. No order as to costs.
30.Consign the file to the record room.
(JUSTICE RITU TAGORE) Member(Judl.) 24-02-2026 DEVENDRA TRIPATHI Digitally signed by Devendra Tripathi Devendra DN: C=IN, O=Personal, T=5448, OID.2.5.4.65= 1335902360675164369yr67OOaFf4FUU, Phone= 236562a5958b9eca99c76e0cd4bf8b9d299d3cc05b5e9e99bdac2e7ed c7b4806, PostalCode=210205, S=Uttar pradesh, SERIALNUMBER= 4bac910bd6fb0517c9c605b6139bc94885e3842e98c5f4b6749726230 Tripathi 9ae27cb, CN=Devendra Tripathi Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.24 15:38:45+05'30'