Jammu and Kashmir High Court
CPSW/404/2015 of SUSHMA DEVI AND ORS. Vs SANJEEV VERMA,SECY.SOCIAL WLFARE AND ORS on 10 July 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CPSW No. 404/2015 in SWP No. 1744/2015 Sushma Devi & Ors. …..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Sumit Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate Vs Sanjeev Verma, Secretary, Social Welfare & Ors. .…. Respondent(s)
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
CPSW No. 404/2015 in
SWP No. 1744/2015
Sushma Devi & Ors.
…..Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Sumit Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Ashok Sharma, Advocate
Vs
Sanjeev Verma, Secretary, Social
Welfare & Ors.
.…. Respondent(s)
Through: Mr. Meharbaan Singh, 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
10.07.2026
01. The petitioners seek implementation of the judgment dated 12.06.2015 passed by this Court in SWP No. 1744/2015, titled Sushma Devi & Ors. v. State & Ors., whereby the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to conclude the selection process within a period of six weeks.
02. Statement of facts have been filed by the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4 &
5. The respondents submitted that Chairman Selection Committee was asked for completion of the selection process. A meeting was convened in the office of respondent No. 3 in which the Chairman Selection Committee requested the respondent No. 3 to call the then Selection Committee members for checking the record and arrive at conclusion. It is further submitted that, pursuant to the said meeting, the record available in the office of the CDPO was examined and certain discrepancies were noticed. In view of the discrepancies so Sr. No. 35
2
found, it was decided to conduct re-interview of the candidates in terms of the earlier notification so that the selection process could be completed at the earliest. They stated that the disciplinary action has also been recommended against the erring Officer. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the respondents have taken steps to comply with the judgment of this Court and that there has been no willful or deliberate disobedience of the directions issued therein.
03. In view of the statement of facts placed on record and the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents, this Court is satisfied that no case of willful disobedience of the judgment dated 12.06.2015 is made out. Accordingly, the proceedings in the present contempt petition are closed.
(Sindhu Sharma) Judge Jammu 10.07.2026 Amit