Parveen Kumar Tayal v. Arun Kumar Gupta, Ias And Others

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Date of Decision: 10.03.2022 Parveen Kumar Tayal ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

Sh. Arun Kumar Gupta, IAS, Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Local Bodies, Haryana and Others ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.

Present:

Mr. Navneet Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondent No.1 and 2.

Anil Kshetarpal, J.

1.

The petitioner prays for initiation of the proceedings under Section 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, while complaining that the order passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 20764 of 2021, decided on 12.10.2021, has not been complied with. The order passed on 12.10.2021 reads as under:- "The hearing of the case was held through video conferencing on account of restricted functioning of the Courts. Through this writ petition, the petitioners, who claims to be the ex-councilors and social workers, pray for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent no.1 and 2 to take an action against the private contractor i.e.

respondent no.5.

The petitioners allege that respondent no.4 while reconstructing a road has used the material which was below the required specifications. They rely upon a report of Shriram Institute of Industrial Research, NewDelhi.

On 11.10.2021, Sh. Samarth Sagar, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, was requested to take complete instructions and assist the Court.

Sh. Sagar has made a statement that the competent authority is seized of the matter and the final decision shall be taken within a period of one month from today. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law, within a period of one month, positively.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of".

2.

Mr. Harsh Vardhan, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, has entered appearance pursuant to the supply of advance copy of the contempt petition and states that as per the information received from the Directorate of Urban Bodies that the Government has, now, concluded that the sub standard material was used in carpeting the roads, hence, appropriate action against the officers as well as the Contractor has already been initiated. He promises to supply a copy of the aforesaid communication to the learned counsel representing the petitioner, while placing on record a copy thereof

on the record of the petition.

3.

In view of the above, no further order is required to be passed and the present petition is disposed of.

(Anil Kshetarpal) Judge March 10, 2022 "DK"

Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No