Sonia v. Sh. Himmat Singh And Another

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 24.09.2025 Sonia ......Petitioner Vs.

Sh. Himmat Singh and another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present :

Mr. Ayush Bansal, Advocate, for Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Ram Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana, for the respondents.

**** SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL) 1.

The present contempt petition has been filed for deliberate and intentional disobedience of order dated 09.04.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-6805-2024.

2.

This Court had issued the following directions in CWP-68052024, vide its order dated 09.04.2024:- "4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Harish Nain, learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that in case, the representation dated 10.03.2024 (Annexure P-11) has been received in the office of the concerned authorities and the same is still pending consideration with the authorities concerned, the

-2same will be decided by the competent authority within a period of eight weeks from the date of the receipt of certified copy of this order by passing an appropriate speaking order."

3.

On the last date of hearing, last opportunity was granted to the respondents to file a compliance affidavit of order dated 09.04.2024, subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with the Poor Patients Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh.

4.

Learned counsel for the respondents has produced in Court a copy of demand draft bearing No.665924 dated 20.09.2025 amounting to Rs.10,000/- drawn on the State Bank of India and submits that the said cost has been deposited in compliance of the order dated 01.09.2025. 5.

Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that in compliance of the order dated 09.04.2024 passed by this Court in CWP6805-2024, a speaking order dated 16.09.2025 has been passed by the Secretary, Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula. A copy of the said order has been placed on record as well as supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner, who does not dispute the same. 6.

In view of the above, since order dated 09.04.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-6805-2024, has already been complied with, therefore, the present contempt is purged and rule stands discharged. 7.

Needless to say that the petitioner is at liberty to avail remedy as is available to her in accordance with law to challenge the speaking order

-3dated 16.09.2025 passed by the Secretary, Haryana Staff Selection Commission, Panchkula.

8.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE 24.09.2025 Virender Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No