Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajeev Arora And Ors vs Satyawan And Anr on 2 August, 2023
Bench: Ravi Shanker Jha, Arun Palli
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:099057-DB
LPA Nos.57 and 83 of 2022 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:099057-DB
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No.57 of 2022 (O&M)
Date of Decision :02.08.2023
Rajeev Arora and others
......Appellants
Versus
Satyawan and another
...... Respondents
LPA No.83 of 2022 (O&M) Rajeev Arora and others ......Appellants Versus Sube Singh ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI SHANKER JHA, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN PALLI, JUDGE Present : Mr. Deepak Balyan, Addl. A.G. Haryana.
Mr. Akshay Bhan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Amandeep Singh Talwar, Advocate for the respondents in LPA No.57 of 2022 Mr. S.S.Sahu, Advocate for the respondent in LPA-83-2022.
RAVI SHANKER JHA, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral):
Learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the original contempt petitions COCP Nos.1862 of 2021 and 2517 of 2021, from which the impugned order dated 13.12.2021, that are the subject matter of these appeals, arise, have been decided as infructuous by the learned Single Bench, in view of the interim order that had been passed by this Court in these appeals and therefore, nothing survives in these appeals.
1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 17-09-2023 11:40:18 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:099057-DB LPA Nos.57 and 83 of 2022 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:099057-DB 2 Learned Senior counsel for the respondents in LPA No.57 of 2022 as well as learned counsel for the respondent in LPA-83-2022, do not dispute this fact, however, after taking into consideration the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Midnapore Peoples' Coop.
Bank Ltd. and others Vs. Chunilal Nanda and others (2006) 5 Supreme Court Cases 399, and Manjula Choudhary Vs. Priyanka Chauhan 2015(4) MPLJ 704, submit that in such circumstances as the impugned orders no longer survive being interim orders passed in contempt petitions which have subsequently been decided as infructuous, the respondents may be granted liberty to assail orders dated 11.08.2021 and 12.10.2021 respectively, passed by the authorities, rejecting their representations, by filing fresh petitions. Learned Senior counsel submits that the respondents in LPA No.57-2022, had, in fact, filed a writ petition against the order dated 11.08.2021, which was registered as CWP No.19177 of 2021, but the same was disposed of as infructuous on 20.12.2021, in view of the impugned interim order passed in the contempt petition. He submits that it may be observed that the order dated 20.12.2021 (ibid) withdrawing the petition shall not come in the way of the petitioners in filing fresh writ petition(s).
Learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, has no objection to the course suggested by the learned Senior counsel.
In the circumstances, as the original contempt petitions have already been decided as infructuous, the impugned interim orders passed 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 17-09-2023 11:40:19 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:099057-DB LPA Nos.57 and 83 of 2022 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:099057-DB 3 in contempt petitions do not survive. Thus, the present Letters Patent Appeals are disposed of granting liberty to the respondents to file fresh petition(s) assailing the order dated 11.08.2021 and 12.10.2021 respectively, passed by the authorities, if so advised.
All the pending civil miscellaneous applications also stand disposed of.
(RAVI SHANKER JHA) CHIEF JUSTICE (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE 02.08.2023 Manoj Bhutani Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:099057-DB 3 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 17-09-2023 11:40:19 :::