Lr/Asi Harjinder Singh v. Sh. Anurag Verma, Ias And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Sr. No.159 COCP- 2139-2024(O&M) Date of Decision:06.03.2025 LR/ASI Harjinder Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

Anurag Verma, IAS and Others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present:

Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl. A.G., Punjab HARKESH MANUJA, J.(ORAL) CM-2846-CII-2025 Application is allowed, as prayed for (i.e. instructions dated 12.09.2011 and relevant documents) as Annexures P-3 and P-4 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

By way of present petition filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, prayer has been made for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents on account of alleged willful non-compliance of order dated 12.03.2024 passed by this Court in CWP5735-2024. The said order is reproduced hereunder:- "2.

Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate inter alia contends that respondent has revised seniority list of the police officials including the petitioner. He has been deprived benefit of promotion on the ground that he had not completed Intermediate School Course. The seniority list has been revised after retirement of the petitioner. The

petitioner in 2016 was of more than 56 years, thus, he was not supposed to undergo aforesaid Course as per instruction dated 12.09.2011 issued by Director General of Police, Punjab. The petitioner cannot be asked to do an act which is impossible. He relies upon judgment of Supreme Court in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Mr. Aman Dhir, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab who on advance notice is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He fairly submits that representation of the petitioner is pending with the authorities and the same may be considered in the light of instructions issued by Director General of Police, Punjab.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees with the aforesaid arrangement.

6.

In the wake of statement of both sides, the present petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide claim of the petitioner within three months from today."

2.

Considering the fact that the aforesaid writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 12.03.2024 with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in terms of policy instructions dated 12.09.2011 and finding that the speaking order dated 15.07.2024 passed by the respondents, no where mentioned of any reference to those instructions, and on request of two week's time sought for by the respondents for passing afresh speaking order in terms of policy instructions dated 12.09.2011, the present contempt petition is disposed of at this stage, however with liberty to revive the present petition, subject to passing of fresh speaking order in terms of the policy instructions dated 12.09.2011.

5.

Rule stands discharged.

( HARKESH MANUJA ) JUDGE 06.03.2025 dinesh Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No Whether reportable?

Yes/No