Early Times Report
JAMMU, Apr 20: Justice Sanjeev Kumar of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court issued show cause notice to the Commissioner Secretary Finance and Deputy Commissioner, Kuthua, as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against them for creating obstruction/hindrance in the implementation of the judgment.
This significant order has been passed in a contempt petition filed by Sunil Kumar & ors for not implementing the judgment dated March 26, 2014. When the contempt petition came-up for hearing, Justice Kumar observed that this is an application seeking modification of order dated 15th March, 2022, passed by this Court, whereby this Court while granting four weeks further time to the respondents to comply with the judgment, also made it clear that in case the judgment was not complied with, Commissioner/Secretary to the Government Jal Shakti, shall appear in person and shall not withdraw his monthly salary, till the judgment was complied with.
Justice Kumar observed that from the reading of the application, it clearly transpires that the judgment passed by this court on 26th March, 2014, is yet not complied with by the respondents. During the course of hearing M. Raju, Commissioner Secretary to the Government, Jal Shakti, Department, appearing through virtual mode, submitted that he has taken up the matter with the Commissioner Secretary Finance, as well as the Deputy Commissioner, concerned for releasing the requisite funds, but he is not getting any positive response from the said authorities.
He showed his inability to comply with the judgment in absence of requisite funds being made available to him by the aforesaid authorities. He submitted that he is also divested of the charge of Commissioner/Secretary to the Government of Jal Shakti and, therefore, cannot be the relevant person to comply with the judgment. The court directed Registry to issue notice to the Commissioner Secretary Finance and Deputy Commissioner, Kathua, to show cause as to why contempt proceedings be not initiated against them for creating obstruction/hindrance in the implementation of the judgment. |
