Lala Ram Yadav v. Anurag Rastogi, Ias And Others

COCP-4098-2025 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-4098-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 25.09.2025 Lala Ram Yadav ......Petitioner Vs.

Anurag Rastogi and others ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present :

Mr. Anil Kumar Rana, Advocate, and Mr. Harsh Rana, 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 24.04.2025 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP-20642-2024.

2.

The Division Bench of this Court had issued the following directions in CWP-20642-2024, vide its order dated 24.04.2025:- "10. We, therefore, dispose of all these writ petitions and allow them in the same terms as above and with further directions to the Administration-respondents to pass specific orders taking into consideration the facts of each case. For the said purpose, we allow the State Government to take decision within a period of two months henceforth as all of the petitioners are already retired and their retiral benefits would be accordingly required to be adjusted and released.

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.09.29 19:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP-4098-2025 (O&M) -211.

The State authorities shall also take into consideration any policy decision which the State Government may take with respect to the persons, who retired having put in more than six months and less than one year of service in their last year of tenure." 3.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in compliance of the order dated 24.04.2025 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP-20642-2024, a speaking order dated 19.09.2025 has been passed by the respondent. A copy thereof has been placed on record as well as supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner, who does not dispute the same. 4.

In view of the above, since order dated 24.04.2025 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CWP-20642-2024, has already been complied with, therefore, the present contempt is purged and rule stands discharged.

5.

Needless to say that the petitioner is at liberty to avail remedy as is available to him in accordance with law to challenge the speaking order dated 19.09.2025 passed by the respondent.

6.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE 25.09.2025 Virender Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.09.29 19:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document