Allowed

M.L. Kaushik v. Beena Aggarwal & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC27 May 2016CACP/16/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge's order holding the appellant guilty of contempt and sentencing him was challenged. The Bench allowed the appeal after noting that the impugned Supreme Court order was belatedly complied with by placing respondents in the required posts, resulting in the setting aside of the contempt order.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 21.04.2016 holding the appellant guilty of contempt is set aside. The appeal is accepted.

M.L. Kaushik Vs Beena Aggarwal & Anr. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Punjab & Haryana HC (2016)

¶1

-1-

¶2

CM-11425-CII-2016 in/and CACP-16-2016 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CM-11425-CII-2016 in/and CACP-16-2016 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.05.2016

M.L. Kaushik

..... Appellant

Versus

Mrs. Beena Aggarwal and others

¶9

..... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: Mr. Birender Singh Rana, Senior Advocate with Mr. Gagandeep Rana, Advocate for the applicant-appellant.

¶11

Mr. Bhupinder Malik, Advocate for Mr. Samrat Malik, Advocate for respondents No. 1 and 2.

¶12

T.P.S. MANN, J. (ORAL)

¶13

CM-11425-CII-2016

¶14

For the reasons stated therein, the application is allowed.

¶15

Short affidavit of respondent No. 1 on behalf of respondents

¶16

No. 1 and 2 is taken on record.

¶17

CACP-16-2016 (O&M)

¶18

Order dated 21.04.2016, passed by the Contempt Bench, in

¶19

holding the appellant guilty of contempt and requiring his presence to hear him on the quantum of punishment stands challenged before this

¶20

RISHU KATARIA 2016.05.31 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶21

CM-11425-CII-2016 in/and CACP-16-2016 (O&M) -2-

¶22

Bench.

¶23

The aforementioned order was passed by the learned Single Judge as the appellant did not comply with the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed on 21.04.2015 directing the State to take immediate steps to adjust respondents No. 1 and 2 against suitable posts within or outside the district where they were earlier working.

¶24

Upon notice, respondents No. 1 and 2 have put in appearance through their counsel who states that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court stands complied with.

¶25

Once the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been complied with, though belatedly, the impugned order holding the appellant guilty of contempt needs to be set side.

¶26

Resultantly, the appeal is accepted and the impugned order dated 21.04.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge, in holding the appellant guilty of contempt is set aside.

¶27

( T.P.S. MANN ) JUDGE May 27, 2016 ( RAMENDRA JAIN ) rishu JUDGE

¶28

RISHU KATARIA 2016.05.31 10:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

M.L. Kaushik v. Beena Aggarwal & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.L. Kaushik v. Beena Aggarwal & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankil Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Surinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Dayal Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Ranjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Vivek Sharma Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. & Anr. Vs Nupur Aggarwal etc.