OWP 322/2000, titled M/s Amin Engineering Excellence Engineers Fabricators and Contrators, v. State of J&K and Others was disposed of on 17-07-2000 in terms as under:- " Heard. The prayer of the petitioner is that a writ in the nature of mandamus may be granted commanding the respondents to pay the petitioner his bill amount against the work namely CEI Shed at Ajas-Latiyar, which work he has executed. Interest @ 23% per annum has also been claimed. The learned counsel has stated that the petitioner is not interested in claiming the relief of interest but he is interested in the payment of the amount of the work which he has executed. The counsel has made a prayer for the disposal of the writ petition at this stage. Hence the petition after its admission is disposed of with a direction to respondents to consider the payment to the petitioner of the work namely CEI shed at Ajas - Latiyar in case he has executed the same as per the schedule. The process of consideration be completed within two months from the date of receipt of this order." 2. Respondents are hooked to this contempt on alleged failure to comply with the above judgment/direction. The other side has filed statement of facts. 3. On facts, the contemners-respondents have raised the plea that the payment could not be made to the petitioner for the reason that the work done in respect or which payments was to be made, falls within the period 1996 to 1999 in respect of which the Government has taken a decision that all such liabilities and claims for their genuineness shall be scrutinized by Director, Audit and Inspections before the funds are made available and released. The work allegedly performed by petitioner in this case is also before the Director, Audit and Inspections and the decision is awaited. Besides the Government has not allotted funds and same are awaited. The counsel further submits that the judgment dated 17-07-2000 for failure of which the respondents are booked, has been passed at the back of the respondents without any opportunity to them and the judgment is not enforceable. 4. The main OWP 322/2000, writ file reveals that the respondents have not been issued pre or post admission notice. Respondents have not appeared in the case. 4. The main OWP 322/2000, writ file reveals that the respondents have not been issued pre or post admission notice. Respondents have not appeared in the case. The petition even though admitted, has been disposed of with above direction without serving notice on other side or without some one appearing for respondents, which was necessary to pass an enforceable order may be while disposing of the petition at admission stage itself. In Union of India v. Daya Ram, 1997, SLJ 155, the Supreme Court observed:- "5...... We appreciate that the writ petition itself was disposed of at the admission stage by consent of parties at that stage rule should have been issued to the present appellants and the judgment and order should have been noted that service thereof was accepted on behalf of the present appellants by learned counsel who was present on their behalf. The final order would have made the rule absolute. The order passed by the learned Single Judge would thus have been passed upon a petition which was admitted and was on the file of the High Court. The order would have been enforceable." 5. Accordingly as above, the contempt is not maintainable, Rule is discharged. Proceedings dropped and matter closed. Disposed of.