High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCOCP/3847/2024dismissed

Rattan Devi v. T.L. Satyaprakash, Ias

2025-09-23Mrs. Justice Sudeepti Sharma2 pages

COCP-3847-2024 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-3847-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.09.2025 Smt. Rattan Devi ......Petitioner Vs.

T.L.Satyaprakash ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present :

Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. H.S.Gill, Advocate, and Mr. Aman Chawariya, Advocate, for the respondent.

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

The present contempt petition has been filed for deliberate and intentional disobedience of order dated 10.12.2019 passed by the Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana and order dated 05.12.2023 passed by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana, in Revision Petition No.49 of 2023 titled as 'Smt. Rattan Devi Vs. Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran'. 2.

A perusal of the order dated 10.12.2019 passed by the Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana and order dated 05.12.2023 passed by the Additional VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.09.26 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP-3847-2024 (O&M) -2Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana, shows that these are the orders passed in the Revision Petitions filed by the petitioner. The first revision petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of as infructuous, vide order dated 10.12.2019 and another revision petition filed by the petitioner, whereby he challenged the order dated 18.05.2023 passed by the Chief Administrator, HSVP, was set aside and order dated 10.12.2019 passed by the Revisional Authority was upheld by the Additional Chief Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department, vide its order dated 05.12.2023. 3.

Since the aforesaid revision petitions were decided on merits after hearing the parties, therefore, no case of contempt is made out. 4.

Consequently, the present petition stands dismissed. 5.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE 23.09.2025 Virender Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.09.26 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document