Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CCP(S)/359/2025 of AKSHAY ARMOURY TH OM PARKASH SHARMA Vs CHANDRAKER BHARTI PR SECY HOME AND ANR on 15 September 2026
34 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CCP(S) No. 359/2025 in WP(C) No. 1517/2025 Akshay Armoury …. Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through:- Mr. Raghav Sawhney, Advocate vice Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate V/s Chandraker Bharti Principal Secretary to Govt. Home Deptt., Civil
Sr. No. 34
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
CCP(S) No. 359/2025 in
WP(C) No. 1517/2025
Akshay Armoury
…. Petitioner/Appellant(s)
Through:-
Mr. Raghav Sawhney, Advocate vice
Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate
V/s
Chandraker Bharti Principal
Secretary to Govt. Home Deptt.,
Civil Secretariat, Jammu and
another
…..Respondent(s)
Through:-
Ms. Nisha Kangotra, Advocate vice
Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
15.09.2026
1. The petitioner seeks implementation of order dated 17.06.2025 passed in WP(C) No. 1517/2025, vide which, the petition was disposed of by directing the respondents to treat the petition as representation and decide the same in accordance with the law preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order.
2. Respondents have filed compliance report. In terms of the compliance report, it is stated that they have duly considered and examined the matter and have passed a detailed speaking order date d19.12.2025, vide which, the claim of the petitioner was rejected being devoid of merit.
3. In the view of the aforesaid, order dated 17.06.2025 stands complied with. The proceedings in the contempt petition are, accordingly, closed. The petitioner is, however, at liberty to assail the consideration order, if so advised. (SINDHU SHARMA) JUDGE
Jammu: 15.09.2026 Vishal Khajuria