Dismissed

Tej Kaur v. Krishan Kumar IAS Princ. Sec. Irrigation Dept and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC26 Sept 2024COCP/3293/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a contempt petition filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act alleging non-compliance of a previous order. The court recorded an undertaking by the respondent to pay benefits within three weeks and dismissed the petition as it was no longer pressed by the petitioner. The petitioner was granted liberty to seek revival if the undertaking was breached.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition dismissed as not pressed; liberty granted to petitioner to seek revival of proceedings if undertaking is breached.

Tej Kaur Vs Krishan Kumar IAS Princ. Sec… — Contempt of Court | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

COCP No.3293 of 2024 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

181

¶5

COCP No.3293 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.09.2024

¶6

TEJ KAUR ......Petitioner Vs KRISHAN KUMAR IAS PRINC. SEC. IRRIGATION DEPT AND OTHERS ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

¶7

Present: Mr. Anupam Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Addl. A.G., Pu n jab.

¶9

Mr. Harmanjit Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶10

Mr. Aman Sharma, Advocate and Mr. Chirag Suri, Advocate for resp o ndent No.4. ****

¶11

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)

¶12

By way of present petition file d under Sections 11 & 12 of the Contempt of C o urts Act, 1971, contempt pro c eedings are sought to be initi a ted against the res p ondents towards alleged will fu l non-compliance of order d a ted 14.11.2023 pas s ed by this Court in CWP No.41 1 2 of 2020. 2. Co m pliance report by way of affi d avit of Sh. Buta Singh, Execu t ive Engineer, Tu b ewell Corporation, Malerk o tla, Punjab Water Resou r ces Management a n d Development Corporation Li m ited on behalf of respondent N o.4 has been filed i n Court, which is taken on recor d . 3. Le a rned counsel representing resp o ndent No.4 on instructions info r ms that the benef i ts payable to the petitioner have been assessed finally a nd disbursement thereof shall be made within three weeks from today.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid underta k ing by respondent No.4, lear n ed counsel for the p etitioner does not press the pre s ent petition. 5. Di s missed as not pressed. Rule sta n ds discharged.

¶14

Ho w ever, in case the needful is n o t done within the aforementio n ed period, as per t h e undertaking, the petitioner w o uld be at liberty to seek reviva l of

¶15

MOHMED ATIK 2024.09.26 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶16

¶17

COCP No.3293 of 2024 (O&M)

¶18

contempt petiti o n and in that eventuality, the erring/concerned officer woul d be liable to pay a s um of Rs.50,000/- as cost(s) fr o m his/her own pocket in favou r of the petitioner t o wards litigation expenses, im m ediately i.e. on the first dat e of listing of reviva l application.

¶19

(HARKESH MANUJA) September 26, 2024 JUDGE Atik Wh e ther speaking/reasoned Yes/No Wh e ther reportable Yes/No

¶20

MOHMED ATIK 2024.09.26 18:30 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Tej Kaur v. Krishan Kumar IAS Princ. Sec. Irrigation Dept and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tej Kaur v. Krishan Kumar IAS Princ. Sec. Irrigation Dept and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karnail Singh Vs T.V.S.N. Prasad and Another

Anita Puri Vs Karamjit Singh, Executive Officer

Kartar Singh Vs Sh. Rohit Yadav, Hcs and Another

Rajpal @ Golu Vs State of Haryana and Another

Murti Devi Vs Shatrujeet Kapur, Dgp and Anr.

Mohit Sharma Vs Kiran