The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court required compliance with an earlier judgment directing acquisition and compensation for land already taken for a road.
Judge / Bench — Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma, Judge
The original six-month period and a later final opportunity had expired. The respondents relied on an appeal, while the petitioners pointed out that delay-condonation proceedings alone were pending and no interim protection existed. The Court held the authorities duty-bound to implement the judgment and gave a final four-week opportunity, failing which respondents 1–5 must appear personally. No contempt punishment was imposed at this stage. The order helps distinguish the filing or proposed pursuit of an appellate remedy from an operative stay, and underscores the continuing obligation to comply with an effective land-compensation direction.
Case — Kewal Singh and others v. Anil Kumar Singh and others · CCP(S) No. 317/2025 in WP(C) No. 1145/2024 · 2026-10-14 · Jammu wing
Advocates appearing — Petitioners — Mr. Rajdeep Singh Thakur, Advocate. Respondents — Ms. Pallavi Sharma, Advocate, vice Mr. Ravinder Gupta, AAG; Ms. Nisha Kangotra, Advocate, vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG.