Naresh Kumar Sharma Vs Dk Tiwari Additional Cheif Secretary, Transport and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Naresh Kumar Sharma Vs Dk Tiwari Additional Cheif Secretary, Transport and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt petition dismissed as not pressed; rule discharged; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of; petitioner at liberty to seek revival of the contempt petition if arrears of pension, gratuity and leave encashment are not released within two weeks as per the undertaking, in which event the erring/concerned officer shall pay Rs. 50,000/- as litigation costs from his/her own pocket on the first date of listing of the revival application.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents have complied with the direction concerning the petitioner's pension, i.e. revocation of the reduction of pension and release of arrears of pension, gratuity and leave encashment.

Court's answer

The reduction of the petitioner's pension stands revoked, as shown by the order dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure R-1/T).

Ratio / Principle

In view of the revocation of the pension reduction and the State's undertaking to release arrears, learned counsel for the petitioner did not press the petition, which was dismissed as not pressed.

Key takeaways

Rule discharged.ratio¶16
Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.ratio¶18
If the needful (release of arrears as per the undertaking) is not done within the aforementioned period, the petitioner would be at liberty to seek revival of the contempt petition.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Harkesh Manuja, J.), COCP No. 284-2025 (O&M), decided 05.02.2025 — Contempt petition by Naresh Kumar Sharma against D.K. Tiwari, Additional Chief Secretary, Transport (Punjab) and others concerning pension dues. Reply affidavit of the General Manager, Punjab Roadways, Chandigarh taken on record; the Court noted that per order dated 03.02.2025 (Annexure R-1/T) the reduction of pension had been revoked, and State counsel undertook to release arrears of pension, gratuity and leave encashment within two weeks. Petition dismissed as not pressed; rule discharged; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of. Liberty reserved to the petitioner to seek revival of the contempt petition upon default, in which event the erring/concerned officer would personally pay Rs. 50,000/- as litigation costs on the first date of listing of the revival application.

COCP-284-2025 (O&M) [1]

242

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

COCP No. 284-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.02.2025

Naresh Kumar Sharma ...Petitioner

VERSUS

D.K. Tiwari, Additional Chief Secy., Transport and ors. …Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present : Ms. Neha Jain, Advocate f or the petitioner. Mr. Siddharth Sandhu, A A G, Punjab.

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

Reply by way of affidavit of Sh.Paramvir Singh, Gen e ral Manage r , Punjab Roadways, Chan d igarh has been filed in C o urt today. The same is taken on recor d . Registry to tag the same at appropri a te place. A perusal of the o r der dated 03.02.2025 Annex u re R-1/T shows that the reduction of pension has been revoked.

Learned State counsel, o n instructions, submits that the arrears o f pension as well as gratuity and leave encashment shall be released in favour of the petitioner within a period of two weeks f r om

today.

In view thereof, learned counsel for the petitioner d o es not pres s the present petition. 3. Dismissed as not pressed.

Rule discharged.

Pending miscellaneous a pplication(s), if any, shall also

stand di s posed of.

However, in case the needful is not done within t he aforeme n tioned period, as per the u n dertaking, the petitioner would

SANJAY GUPTA 2025.02.07 12:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

COCP-284-2025 (O&M) [2]

be at liberty to seek revival of c ontempt petition and in t h at eventuality, the erring/concerned offi c er would be liable to pay a s u m of Rs.5 0 ,000/- as cost(s) from his/h e r own pocket in favour of t he petitioner towards litigation expense s , immediately i.e. on the f irst date of li s ting of revival application

05.02.2 0 25 ( HARKESH MANUJA) sanjay JUDGE

Whether speaking/reason e d ? Yes/No Whether Reportable ? Yes/No

SANJAY GUPTA 2025.02.07 12:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document