Disposed¶37

Om Parkash and Anr. v. Vinay Kumar , Irps and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Sept 2025COCP/2203/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

COCP-2203-2024 (O&M); contempt petition; compliance of order dated 06.02.2024 in CWP-1827-2021; Om Parkash and another v. State of Haryana and others; Ritu Devi; Anil Kumar; Setno-typist (Hindi) post; Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department Haryana; Director General Health Services Haryana; speaking order dated 27.09.2024 (Rajnarayan Kaushik); speaking orders dated 22.07.2025 and 01.08.2025 (Dr. Manish Bansal); rule discharged; contempt purged; liberty to challenge speaking orders; Sudeepti Sharma J.; decided 23.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Rule stands discharged, contempt being purged upon finding of compliance; petitioners left free to pursue lawful remedies against the speaking orders dated 27.09.2024, 22.07.2025 and 01.08.2025; pending applications disposed of. ¶37

Om Parkash and Anr. Vs Vinay Kumar , Irps and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners committed deliberate and intentional disobedience of order dated 06.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-1827-2021 (directing decision within eight weeks of any claim to appointment against the posts vacated by Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar), or whether that order has since been complied with.

¶16

Court's answer

Since order dated 06.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-1827-2021 has already been complied with (through the speaking orders dated 27.09.2024, 22.07.2025 and 01.08.2025 passed after according opportunities of hearing), the present contempt is purged and rule stands discharged.

¶37

Key takeaways

The petitioners are at liberty to avail the remedy available to them in accordance with law to challenge the speaking order dated 27.09.2024 passed by Sh. Rajnarayan Kaushik (annexed with compliance report dated 20.01.2025) as well as the speaking orders dated 22.07.2025 and 01.08.2025 passed by Dr. Manish Bansal (annexed with compliance report dated 04.08.2025).obiter¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition (COCP-2203-2024) alleging deliberate and intentional disobedience of the order dated 06.02.2024 of the High Court in CWP-1827-2021, whereby the State was to consider and decide, within eight weeks and by speaking order, any claim of the petitioners to appointment against two posts of Setno-typist (Hindi) vacated by Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar. The Court found compliance effected: the Director, Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department, Haryana heard the petitioners' authorised representative and passed a speaking order dated 27.09.2024, and the Director General Health Services, Haryana, after personal hearings on 01.07.2025 and 01.08.2025, decided the claims vide speaking orders dated 22.07.2025 and 01.08.2025. Holding the order complied with, the Court purged the contempt and discharged the rule, while leaving the petitioners at liberty to challenge the three speaking orders in accordance with law; pending applications stood disposed of.

¶1

-1-

¶2

COCP-2203-2024 (O&M)

¶3

223

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

COCP-2203-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.09.2025

¶6

Om Parkash and another

¶7

......Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Vinay Kumar and others

¶10

......Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶12

Present : Mr. Parveen Chauhan, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Ram Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana, for the respondents.

¶14

¶15

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL)

¶16

The present contempt petition has been filed for deliberate and intentional disobedience of order dated 06.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-1827-2021.

¶17

This Court had issued the following directions in CWP-18272021, vide its order dated 06.02.2024:-

¶18

“2. Learned State counsel submits that nothing has come on record as to whether any post in the category in which the petitioners had competed has become vacant within the subsistence of the waiting list, but in case any claim is raised by the petitioner with regard to the vacation of the post by two candidates namely Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar by filing of the representation before the authorities concerned, the same will be considered and decided in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by passing appropriate speaking order.

¶19

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.09.26 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

COCP-2203-2024 (O&M)

¶21

-2-

¶22

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that keeping in view the statement of learned State counsel, the present petition may kindly be disposed of having been not pressed, at this stage, with liberty to file a representation with respondents so as to claim for appointment against two posts left by Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar.”

¶23

In compliance of the order dated 06.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-1827-2021, compliance report by way of affidavit dated 20.01.2025 of Sh. Rajnarayan Kaushik, Director, Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department, Haryana, along with annexures, has been filed on behalf of respondent No.2 before the Registry. The relevant portion of the said compliance report is reproduced as under:-

¶24

“2. That in this regard it is respectfully submitted that in compliance of order dated 06.02.2024 the office of answering deponent accorded the opportunity of being heard to the petitioner on 17.09.2024.

¶25

3. That both the petitioners expressed their inability to attend the office for hearing. However, through written consent (Annexure R/1 & R/2) they submitted that Sh. Ram Mehar father of petitioner namely Rubi is authorized to represent them.

¶26

4. That in view of written consent submitted by both the petitioners, representative of the petitioners was heard and a detailed speaking order dated 27.09.2024 (Annexure R/3) was passed.”

¶27

Thereafter, in compliance of the order dated 06.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-1827-2021, compliance report by way of affidavit dated 04.08.2025 of Dr. Manish Bansal, Director General Health Services, Haryana, along with annexures, has been filed on behalf of respondent No.3 before the Registry. The relevant portion of the said compliance report is

¶28

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.09.26 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶29

COCP-2203-2024 (O&M)

¶30

-3-

¶31

reproduced as under:-

¶32

“2. That it is respectfully submitted that the present contempt petition is filed by the petitioner for non compliance of the order dated 06.02.2024 (R-1) passed by the Hon'ble High Court in CWP No.1827 of 2021 – Om Parkash and another Vs. State of Haryana and others. In compliance with this orders, the petitioners have submitted their representation dated 20.03.2024 (R2) to the Director General, Agriculture and Farmer Welfare Department, Sector 21, Panchkula (Haryana) and Director General, Health & Family Welfare Department, Sector 6, Panchkula (Haryana) for their appointment against the post of Setno-typist (Hindi) vacated by two selected candidates namely Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar.

¶33

4. That it is respectfully submitted that after granting a personal hearing to the petitioners Smt. Rubi Rani on dated 01.07.2025 and Sh. Omparkash on dated 01.08.2025 and representation/claim of the petitioners for appointment in the Health Department against one post of Setno- typist (Hindi) vacated by Ritu Devi in BCB (OH) and Anil Kumar has been decided by the deponent vide speaking order dated 22.07.2025 (R-3) and order dated 01.08.2025 (R-4). Hence, the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court has been complied with.”

¶34

Learned counsel for the respondents contends that in compliance of order dated 06.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-18272021, after granting personal hearing to the petitioners, their representations/claims were considered and decided vide speaking orders dated 22.07.2025 (Annexure R-3) and 01.08.2025 (Annexure R-4) by Dr. Manish Bansal, Director General Health Service, Haryana. Further contends that a copy of the said compliance report dated 04.08.2025, along with speaking orders 22.07.2025 (Annexure R-3) and 01.08.2025 (Annexure R- 4), have already been supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶35

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.09.26 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶36

COCP-2203-2024 (O&M) -4-

¶37

In view of the above, since order dated 06.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-1827-2021, has already been complied with, therefore, the present contempt is purged and rule stands discharged.

¶38

Needless to say that the petitioners are at liberty to avail remedy as is available to them in accordance with law to challenge the speaking order dated 27.09.2024 (Annexure R/3) passed by Sh. Rajnarayan Kaushik, Director, Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department, Haryana, annexed with compliance report dated 20.01.2025 as well as the speaking orders dated 22.07.2025 (Annexure R-3) and 01.08.2025 (Annexure R-4) passed by Dr. Manish Bansal, Director General Health Service, Haryana, annexed with compliance report dated 04.08.2025.

¶39

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

¶40

(SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE

¶41

23.09.2025 Virender

¶42

Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶43

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2025.09.26 10:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Alleged deliberate and intentional disobedience of order dated 06.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-1827-2021 (which had directed consideration and decision, within eight weeks, of any claim to appointment against posts vacated by Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar)¶16
High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh (this Court) · 06.02.2024
Prior proceeding
In CWP-1827-2021 (Om Parkash and another v. State of Haryana and others), vide order dated 06.02.2024, this Court recorded the State counsel's statement and directed that any claim raised regarding vacation of posts by Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar be considered and decided in accordance with law within eight weeks by appropriate speaking order.¶18
Prior proceeding
The writ petition CWP-1827-2021 was disposed of as not pressed, with liberty to file a representation with the respondents claiming appointment against the two posts left by Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar.¶22
Prior proceeding
Respondent No.2 compliance: affidavit dated 20.01.2025 of Sh. Rajnarayan Kaushik, Director, Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Department, Haryana filed before the Registry; opportunity of hearing accorded to the petitioner on 17.09.2024; petitioners expressed inability to attend and authorised Sh. Ram Mehar (father of petitioner Rubi) by written consent; their representative was heard and a detailed speaking order dated 27.09.2024 (Annexure R/3) was passed.¶26
Prior proceeding
Respondent No.3 compliance: affidavit dated 04.08.2025 of Dr. Manish Bansal, Director General Health Services, Haryana; petitioners had submitted representations dated 20.03.2024 to the Director General, Agriculture and Farmer Welfare Department and Director General, Health & Family Welfare Department seeking appointment against the post of Setno-typist (Hindi) vacated by Ritu Devi and Anil Kumar; personal hearings were granted to Smt. Rubi Rani on 01.07.2025 and Sh. Omparkash on 01.08.2025, and the claims were decided vide speaking order dated 22.07.2025 (R-3) and order dated 01.08.2025 (R-4), with compliance of the High Court order declared.¶33
Prior proceeding
Respondents' counsel contended that a copy of the compliance report dated 04.08.2025, along with speaking orders dated 22.07.2025 (Annexure R-3) and 01.08.2025 (Annexure R-4), had already been supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioners.¶34

Om Parkash and Anr. v. Vinay Kumar , Irps and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Om Parkash and Anr. v. Vinay Kumar , Irps and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shanti Devi and Others Vs Pawan and Others

Daulat Ram Narwara Vs State of Haryana

United India Insurance Co. Vs Sonia & Ors.

Ranjit Kaur Vs Bikramjit Singh and Others

Jasbir Singh Vs Sonali Arora

Subhash Chander Sharma Vs Saket Kumar, Ias, Md, Uhbvnl and Ors.