Surender Kumar v. Rajeev Arora And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH COCP-1158-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision :13.07.2022 Surender Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

Rajeev Arora & ors.

....Respondents Coram :

Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.S. Walia Present :

Mr. Mohit, Advocate, for Mr. Sumit Sangwan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Pawan Kumar Longia, DAG, Haryana.

B.S. Walia, J. (Oral) 1.

Prayer in the petition is for initiation of proceedings against the respondents for intentional and willful defiance of order, Annexure P/1 dated 15.03.2022, in CWP-5198-2022 in case titled as Surender Kumar vs. State of Haryana and ors.

2.

A perusal of order Annexure P/1 reveals that CWP-5198-2022 was disposed of vide order dated 15.03.2022 by passing the following order:- "The present petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondents to decide the question of payment of ex gratia compensation to the petitioner in terms of his appointment letter. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail of appropriate remedy in accordance with law regarding his termination dated 19.11.2020. The question of payment of ex gratia compensation to the petitioner is to be decided within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Writ petition is disposed off in above terms." 3.

Learned DAG has filed an affidavit along with orders dated 8.06.2022 and 21.06.2022 (Annexures R/1 and R/2 respectively) as per which MONIKA VERMA 2022.07.16 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment Chandigarh

COCP-1158-2022 (O&M) -2the petitioner has been sanctioned ex-gratia payment of Rs.1,00,000/-. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is entitled to Rs.3,00,000/- on account of ex-gratia payment, but in the circumstances, he does not press the instant petition and may be permitted to withdraw the same with libertyto challenge the denial of the remaining Rs.2,00,000/- on account of ex-gratia payment by way of appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

5.

In view of the position noted above as well as statement of learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant petition is disposed of as not calling for any action against respondent No.3 under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 while granting liberty to the petitioner as prayed for. 6.

Rule discharged.

13.07.2022 (B.S. WALIA) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MONIKA VERMA 2022.07.16 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order / judgment Chandigarh