Contempt petition alleging violation of an interim status quo order concerning panchayat land. Respondents showed possession had passed to the Gram Panchayat before the order and subsequent auctions continued the existing state. No willful disobedience found; petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
COCP-1456-2025 (O & M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
106
COCP No.1456 of 2025 (O & M) Date of decision :-16.04.2026
Mohinder
…..Petitioner
Versus
Dr. Manoj Kumar, Deputy Commissioner, Sonipat and others
…..Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:Mr. Anand Kumar Maurya, A dvocate for Mr. Parminder Singh, Advo c ate for the petitioner.
Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl. A .G., Haryana for respondents No.1 and 2.
Mr. Sandeep Parkash Chaha r , Advocate for respondent No.3.
NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)
The present contempt peti t ion has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the interim order dated 01.04.2024 (Annexure P-1), pas s ed by a Division Bench of th i s Court in CWP-7156-2024 titled “ M ohinder vs. State of Haryan a and others” , whereby the parties w ere directed to maintain stat u s quo with regard to the property i n dispute.
Mr. Sandeep Parkash Ch a har, Advocate has put in appearan c e and filed Power of Attorney o n behalf of respondent No.3. The sam e is taken on record.
VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.17 17.20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
2
COCP-1456-2025 (O & M)
At the outset, learned cou n sel for the respondents has invited t h e attention of this Court to the averments contained in paragrap h 4 of the short reply dated 06. 0 1.2026/31.12.2025, filed by way of a f fidavit of Shri Manish Malik, A ssistant Collector 1st Grade, Sonipat- c um-District Development and Panchayat Officer, Sonipat (respond e nt No.2), on behalf of respond e nts No.1 and 2, which reads as follow s :-
“4. That the prese n t contempt petition is liable to be dismissed as in compliance of the ejectment orders, the possess i on of the suit land was delivered to the Gram Panchayat on 21.08.2023 as per rules. And further , the Gram Panchayat leased out the land to one S h . Chand Singh S/o Surjeet in Rs. 20,000/- per acre in open auction which was held on 29-08-2023 f or one crop i.e. upto April, 2024, meaning there b y that the land in question was under lease til l 01-05-2024. It is further submitted that from 0 1 -05-2024 to 12-11-2024 the land in question was u nder the possession of Gram Panchayat Jajal and t he same was not leased out due to insufficient i rrigation facility. However thereafter the suit la n d was further leased out to Sh. Chand in open a uction upto April, 2025 in rupees 22,500/- and at present the suit land is under lease with the a bove mentioned Sh. Chand. The copy of the Rapat Rojnamcha dated 21-082023 is annexed as A n nexure R-1 and the copy of lease register dated 2 9-08-2023 and the copy of lease register dated 12-11-2024 are annexed as Annexure R-2 for ki n d perusal of this Hon'ble High Court. Since, t he suit land is owned and
VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.17 17.20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
COCP-1456-2025 (O & M) 3
possessed by Gram P anchayat and the suit land was leased out by the Gram Panchayat in open auction continuously t o generate fund, hence gram panchayat is maintai n ing statusquo, qua the land in question hence peti t ion of the petitioner is liable to be dismissed.”
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that in complian c e with the ejectment orders, possession of the land in question had already been delivered t o the Gram Panchayat on 21.08.20 2 3, much prior to the passing of the interim order dated 01.04.20 2 4. It is further averred that th e reafter the Gram Panchayat leased ou t the land through open auction f or cultivation purposes from time to t ime, including the period pri o r to and subsequent to the interim o rder. It has been specificall y pointed out that the land remained under lease up to April 2024 a n d thereafter remained in the possession of the Gram Panchayat for a certain period, before being again lea s ed out through open auction. The relevant record, including the Rapa t Roznamcha dated 21.08.202 3 and entries from the lease register, h as been appended with the repl y as Annexures R-1 and R-2. On the strength of the afore s aid factual position, learned counsel fo r the respondents submits that the petitioner was merely an encroach e r over the land in dispute and h a d already been dispossessed prior to t h e passing of the status quo or d er. It is thus contended that the natur e and possession of the proper t y remained unchanged after 01.04.20 2 4 and, therefore, there is no violation, much less willful disobedi e nce, of the order passed by this C ourt.
VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.17 17.20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
4
COCP-1456-2025 (O & M)
Having heard learned coun s el for the parties and upon perusal o f the material available on reco r d, this Court finds substance in the su b missions advanced on behalf o f the respondents. The record indicates that possession had already b e en taken over by the Gram Panchay a t on 21.08.2023, i.e. well be f ore the interim order dated 01.04.20 2 4 came to be passed. The su b sequent leasing of the land through o pen auction appears to be a con t inuation of the existing state of affairs and does not, in any manner, al t er the status quo as it existed on the da t e of the said order.
In view of the above, no ca s e of willful disobedience of the order dated 01.04.2024 is made out.
Consequently, the present contempt petition is dismissed . Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if a n y, shall also stand disposed of.
April 16, 2026 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) Vijay Asija JUDGE
Whether sp e aking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Re p ortable Yes / No
VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.17 17.20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether there was willful disobedience of the interim status quo order dated 01.04.2024 in respect of the land in dispute?
Mohinder
Dr. Manoj Kumar, Deputy Commissioner, Sonipat
Manish Malik, Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sonipat-cum-District Development and Panchayat Officer, Sonipat
Nidhi Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
