High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCOCP/4810/2025disposed of

Sarla Yadav And Another v. Chander Shekhar Khare And Others

2026-04-23Mr. Justice Vikas Bahl7 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH *** Date of decision : 12.11.2025 Sarla Yadav and another ... Petitioners

Versus

Chander Shekhar Khare and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present:

Mr.Jugam Arora, Advocate and Mr.J.S. Bhogal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms.Nihar Bala, Advocate for Mr.Harmanjot Singh Gill, Advocate for the respondents.

VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL) 1.

On 11.11.2025, this Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Present: Mr. R.K. Arora, Senior Advocate with Mr.Jugam Arora, Advocate, Mr.Prabhat K.Jalbera, Advocate and Mr.J.S. Bhogal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.Harmanjot Singh Gill, Advocate and Ms.Nihar Bala, Advocate for the respondents.

Ms.Vaishali Singh, respondent no.2 in person (through V.C.).

*** A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated

11.07.2025 had disposed of the CWP-19067-2025 by passing the following order:- "4. Without commenting on merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3-Administrator, Haryana Shaheri Vikas Pradhikaran to look into the pending representation dated 19.06.2025 (Annexures P-3) and pass an appropriate reasoned order thereon, in accordance with law, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy/production of this order. 5.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of."

Since there was no compliance of the said order, the petitioners were forced to file the present contempt petition. On 19.09.2025, this Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "Present:- Mr. Jugam Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Nihar Bala, Advocate, for Mr. Harmanjot Singh Gill, Advocate for the respondents-HSVP.

*** Learned counsel for the respondents prays for two weeks time to submit the compliance report.

Adjourned to 14.10.2025.

To be taken up in the urgent list.

September 19, 2025"

Thereafter on 14.10.2025, this Court was pleased to pass the following order:-

"Present:- Mr. Jugam Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.

Ms. Nihar Bala, Advocate for Mr. Harmanjot Singh Gill, Advocate for the respondents-HSVP.

**** Last opportunity is granted to the respondents to comply with the order dated 11.07.2025.

Adjourned to 04.11.2025.

To be taken up in the urgent list.

14.10.2025"

Again, since compliance had not been done, this Court was pleased to pass the following order on 04.11.2025:- "Present: Mr.Nikhil Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.H.S. Gill, Advocate for the respondents.

*** Learned counsel for the respondents prays for another adjournment to comply with the order passed by the Division Bench dated 11.07.2025.

A perusal of the paper book would show that earlier also, two dates have been taken. On 14.10.2025, it was specifically mentioned that the last opportunity is granted to the respondents to comply with the order dated 11.07.2025.

Adjourned to 11.11.2025.

To be shown in the urgent list.

It is made clear that in case the order is not complied with and the compliance report is

not submitted, then, respondents no.1 and 2 are directed to appear in person before this Court on the next date of hearing.

November 04, 2025"

When the case was taken up in the morning, neither the compliance report had been submitted nor the orders had been complied with, nor respondents no.1 and 2 had appeared in the Court. Accordingly, a request for pass over was made and the matter was passed over and at 11:20 AM, when the matter was taken up again, respondent no.2 appeared through video conferencing. However, respondent no.1 has not appeared. When this Court was about to proceed further to initiate action in the present matter, learned counsel for the respondents apologized to the Court and submitted that the order of the Court would be complied with today itself and for the inconvenience caused to the petitioners and the litigation expenses borne by the petitioners, the respondents would pay Rs.25,000/- to each of the petitioners before 12 o'clock tomorrow.

Adjourned to 12.11.2025.

To be taken up at 12:00 noon.

In case the amount of Rs.25,000/-, as undertaken before this Court is not paid when the matter is taken up or the order of the Division Bench is not complied with, then further action in accordance with law would be taken. November 11, 2025"

Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted a compliance report and has referred to Annexure R-2 to show that the amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.25,000/- each) has been paid to each of the

petitioners which fact has been reaffirmed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned counsel for the respondents has further referred to Annexure R-1 which is a speaking order dated 11.11.2025 which has been passed in pursuance of the order dated 11.07.2025 passed by the Division Bench. The relevant portion of the said order is reproduced hereinbelow:- "Approval of the Competent Authority The Competent Authority after examining the proposal sent by this office and Estate Office-II, HSVP, Gurugram vide letter dated 10.11.2025 has conveyed that in view of the policy dated 18.02.2013 and 06.08.2024, necessary action regarding payment of interest may be taken subject to following conditions :- 1.

While refunding the amount an indemnity bond/undertaking from person who is receiving the payment be obtained that in case of any dispute the amount shall be refundable:

2. It may also be ensured that no affidavit/undertaking was given by the re-allottee that he will not claim any interest for delay in allotment of plot;

3. It may also be ensured that present allottee fulfils all the conditions of HSVP policies issued regarding exchange of plots in lieu of originally allotted plots from timeto time.

Observations and Conclusion In view of the approval of the Competent Authority dated 10.11.2025, petitioners are found entitled to interest @ 9% p.a. on delayed possession as per policy instructions dated 18.02.2013 and 06.08.2024.

Estate Officer-II, HSVP, Gurugram is hereby directed to ensure making of refund of the

amount on account of delay in possession as per policy guidelines dated 18.02.2013 and 06.08.2024 within one week after due verification and fulfilment of conditions as conveyed in approval granted by the Competent Authority. In view of the above, representation of the petitioners dated 18.06.2025 is disposed off and order dated 11.07.2025 of the Hon'ble High Court is complied with.

All concerned to be informed through registered post. Sd/- Administrator HSVP, Gurugram.

11.11.2025"

Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that in case the petitioners are ready to comply with conditions no.1, 2 and 3 as mentioned in the speaking order and has been reproduced hereinabove, then, the amount would be released to them within a period of one week from the date the above three conditions have been complied with. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners would comply with the said conditions as expeditiously as possible and has further submitted that in case the petitioners are aggrieved with the speaking order dated 11.11.2025, then, liberty be granted to the petitioners to challenge the same. It is submitted that in view of the abovesaid observations, the present contempt petition be disposed of and the respondents be bound by the statement made before this Court. 4.

Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances, the present contempt petition is disposed of. The respondents would be bound

by the statement made before this Court. On the petitioners complying with the conditions mentioned in the speaking order, the amount due to them would be released within a period of one week from the date of the compliance of the conditions mentioned in the order. In case the respondents back track from the same, it would be open to the petitioners to revive the present contempt petition. It would also be open to the petitioners to challenge the speaking order dated 11.11.2025 in case the petitioners are aggrieved with the same, to the extent of said grievance. (VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE November 12, 2025.

Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No