Ishwar Singh and Ors. Vs Anurag Rastogi and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Ishwar Singh and Ors. Vs Anurag Rastogi and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of as not pressed, in terms of the order dated 20.4.2026 in COCP No.1742 of 2026; liberty granted to revive the contempt petition if the State's undertaking (three-week compliance with the order dated 21.5.2025 in COCP No.1789 of 2025) is not complied with; rule discharged; pending applications disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether contempt proceedings should be initiated against the respondents for alleged non-compliance with the interim order dated 19.1.2026 passed in CWP No.1002 of 2026 restraining refixation of pay pursuant to the orders dated 10.9.2024 and 24.9.2024, and how the petition should be disposed of.

Court's answer

Since the petition was similar to COCP No.1742 of 2026 and, in view of the State's statement, counsel for the petitioners did not press the present contempt petition any further, the Court disposed of it accordingly, in terms of the order dated 20.4.2026 passed in COCP-1742-2026.

Ratio / Principle

Liberty is granted to the petitioners to revive the present contempt petition in case the abovesaid undertaking (compliance within three weeks with the order dated 21.5.2025 in COCP No.1789 of 2025, as recorded in the order dated 20.4.2026 in COCP-1742-2026) is not complied with by the respondents.

Key takeaways

Rule stands discharged; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

COCP No.2627 of 2026 (O & M) | High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh | Nidhi Gupta J. (Oral) | decided 25.05.2026. Contempt petition by Ishwar Singh and others against Anurag Rastogi, Chief Secretary, Haryana, alleging non-compliance with the interim order dated 19.1.2026 (Annexure P-1) in CWP No.1002 of 2026, restraining the respondents from any action regarding refixation of pay pursuant to orders dated 10.9.2024 and 24.9.2024 (Annexures P-21 and P-27). Petition stated to be similar to COCP No.1742 of 2026, disposed of on 20.4.2026 (dismissed as not pressed) on the State's undertaking to comply within three weeks with the order dated 21.5.2025 in COCP No.1789 of 2025 (Ramkaran and others vs. Anurag Rastogi and others), subject to CWP-4971-2025. Counsel for the petitioners did not press the petition; disposed of accordingly, with liberty to revive if the undertaking is not complied with; rule discharged.

COCP-2627-2026 (O & M)

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

117

COCP No.2627 of 2026 (O & M) Date of decision :-25.05.2026

Ishwar Singh and others

…..Petitioners

Versus

Anurag Rastogi, Chief Secretary, State of Haryana and others

…..Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present:Ms. Mona Yadav, Advocate f or Mr. Ranjit Singh Kalra, Adv o cate for the petitioners.

Mr. Naveen Kumar, Addl. A. G ., Haryana.

NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)

Prayer in the present petitio n is for initiation of contempt proceedi n gs against the respondents for n ot complying the order dated 19.1.202 6 (Annexure P-1) passed by a c o -ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP N o.1002 of 2026 titled as “Ishwa r Singh and others vs. State of Haryana a nd others”, vide which notice o f motion was issued and it was ordered t h at “…In the meanwhile, the re sp ondents are restrained from taking an y action regarding refixation of p ay pursuant to the impugned orders, d ated 10.9.2024 and 24.9.2024, Annexures P-21 and P-27, respectiv e ly….” .

Learned counsel for the S t ate, at the very outset, on instructio n s, submits that the present co n tempt petition is similar to previous COCP No.1742 of 2026 and si m ilar other matters. COCP-

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.27 09.31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP-2627-2026 (O & M)

2

1742-202 6 has been disposed of by t h is Court vide order dated 20.4.202 6 (Annexure P-2). It is submit t ed that the present contempt petition b e also disposed of in terms of or d er dated 20.4.2026 (Annexure P-2), whi c h reads as follows :-

“Learned coun s el for the petitioner submits that contempt procee d ings be initiated against the respondent(s) for not complying the interim order dated 19.1.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed by a coordinate Bench of thi s Court in CWP No.1018 of 2026, vide which, whil e issuing notice of motion, the matter was ordered t o be heard alongwith CWP23822-2024 and m e anwhile respondents were restrained from tak i ng any action regarding refixation of pay purs u ant to the impugned orders, dated 10.9.2024 and 2 4 .9.2024 (Annexures P-21 and P-27) respectively.

Learned couns e l for the respondent-State refers to the order d a ted 21.5.2025 passed by coordinate Bench of thi s Court in COCP No.1789 of 2025 titled as “Ram k aran and others vs. Anurag Rastogi and others” whereby the petition was disposed of on the s tatement made by learned counsel for the Stat e to the effect that “….the petitioner soule be pai d the revised pension in terms of the revision carried out in pursuance of the order dated 03.8.2023 from t he date the stay was granted in the present case i .e. 21.2.2025 and the same would be done subjec t to the further orders passed in CWP-4971-2025. I t is submitted that the arrears on the said account would be released within a period of three week s from today. It is however submitted that the rele a se of the said amount and the payment every month in pursuance of the orders dated 03.8.2023 sho u ld not be construed as an

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.27 09.31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

COCP-2627-2026 (O & M)

3

estoppels against the r e spondents from opposing the writ petition.” Lea r ned counsel for the State undertakes that in te r ms of the said order dated 21.5.2025, referred a bove, necessary compliance would be made within t hree weeks from today.

In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioners does not press the present petition any further.

Dismissed as not pressed.

Liberty is grant e d to the petitioners to revive the contempt petiti o n in case the abovesaid undertaking is not com p lied with by the respondents. Rule stands disc h arged.

Pending applic a tion(s), if any, shall stands

disposed of.”

In view of the above and t h e statement made by learned counsel f o r the State, learned counsel for t he petitioner submits that she does not p ress the present contempt petit i on any further and the same may be d i sposed of as such.

Ordered accordingly.

Liberty is granted to the pe t itioners to revive the present contempt petition in case the abovesaid un d ertaking is not complied with by the res p ondents.

Rule Stands discharged

Pending application(s), if any , shall stands disposed of.

Whether s p eaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether R e portable Yes / No

VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.27 09.31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document