Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lakhvir Singh vs Sh. Rk Mishra, Ifs, Pccf (Hoff) And Anr on 3 March, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:029861
COCP No.682 of 2025 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
152 COCP No.682 of 2025
DATE OF DECISION :- 03.03.2025
Lakhvir Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
Sh. R.K. Mishra and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present:- Mr. Amrik Singh, Advocates for the petitioner.
Mr. Athar Ahmad, DAG, Punjab.
***
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)
1. By way of present petition, contempt proceedings have been sought to be initiated on account of alleged wilfull non-compliance of order dated 29.10.2024 whereby the respondents were directed to pass reasoned order on the claim made by the petitioner towards regularization of his service.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent relies upon speaking order dated 16.12.2024 whereby the claim of the petitioner stands rejected, however, a perusal thereof no where reflect any reason or justification for rejecting the claim of the petitioner nor even any particular clause of the relevant regularization policy has been referred based on which the claim has been rejected.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 07-03-2025 00:10:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:029861 COCP No.682 of 2025 2
3. In such circumstances, before proceeding further, in the present petition the respondents are directed to reconsider the matter after hearing the petitioner and going through the relevant regularization policies and also by passing well reasoned and speaking order. Learned counsel for the respondent assures that the needful exercise shall be carried out within four weeks from today.
4. However, in case the needful is not done within the aforementioned period, as per the undertaking, the petitioner would be at liberty to seek revival of the contempt petition and in that eventuality, the erring/concerned officer would be liable to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/-as cost(s) from his/her own pocket in favour of the petitioner towards litigation expenses, immediately i.e. on the first date of listing of revival application.
5. In view thereof, at this stage, no cause survives in the present petition and the same is thus, disposed of.
6. Rule stands discharged.
(HARKESH MANUJA)
JUDGE
03.03.2025
P.Singh
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 07-03-2025 00:10:42 :::