High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCOCP/207/2017dismissed

Jaswant Singh & ORS v. Devender Kumar & ANR

2019-02-07Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur2 pages

CMs-1942 and 19682-CII-2017 in/and COCP-207-2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Cms-1942 and 19682-CII-2017 in/and COCP-207-2017 Date of Decision: February 07, 2019 Jaswant Singh and others .....Petitioners

Versus

Devender Singh @ Bhola and another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE NIRMALJIT KAUR

Present:

Mr.S.K.Verma, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.Rakesh Nehra, Advocate for the respondents. ........

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) CM-1942-CII-2017 Application for exemption is allowed.

CM-19682-CII-2017 Application is allowed as prayed for and reply alongwith Annexures R1 and R2 is taken on record.

COCP-207-2017 The contempt is filed for non-compliance of the order dated 09.11.2016 vide which a direction was issued to respondent No.3 in particular to decide the application made by the petitioners for becoming life members of the society one way or the other, in accordance with law. Reply has been filed. As per the said reply, the order has been complied with by way of Annexure R-2 dated 07.01.2017 rejecting MEENU 2019.02.08 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

CMs-1942 and 19682-CII-2017 in/and COCP-207-2017 -2application of the petitioners.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners states that Annexure R-2 is not a decision/order, but is an inquiry report. He further states that the decision was required to be taken by the Secretary or the Chairman of the Society.

The argument of learned counsel for the petitioners does not help. Admittedly, the directions were issued to respondent No.3, who is Shri Vishawkarma Education Society, of which the members are the same who have passed Annexure R-2. The heading written on Annexure R-2 as 'Inquiry Report' does not make the said order/decision invalid. It is specifically stated in the reply that the same has been passed in compliance of the order dated 09.11.2016.

In view of the same, contempt is dismissed.

The rule issued against the respondent(s) stands discharged. However, the petitioners are at liberty to challenge Annexure R2 in accordance with law.

February 07, 2019 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No MEENU 2019.02.08 10:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh