Disposed¶4

Parmod Kumar v. Ajay Singhal

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Jul 2026COCP/2950/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Chandigarh; contempt petition disposed; Haryana police; premature retirement; representation dated 09.04.2026; Annual Confidential Report (ACR) 14.12.2022 to 31.03.2023; DGP Haryana order dated 11.06.2026 (Annexure P-3); DCP Headquarters Gurugram order dated 16.06.2026; liberty to petitioner to avail remedies; pending applications closed; Ms. Ambika Luthra, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for respondent-State.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to avail his remedies against the order dated 16.06.2026 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Headquarters, Gurugram, in accordance with law (if so advised); pending applications closed. ¶4

Parmod Kumar Vs Ajay Singhal — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶4

Issue for consideration

Whether the direction regarding the petitioner's Annual Confidential Report for the period 14.12.2022 to 31.03.2023 stood complied with, a direction having been issued by the Director General of Police, Haryana, vide order dated 11.06.2026 (Annexure P-3). +1 more

¶2

Ratio / Principle

Since the issue regarding the petitioner's premature retirement stands decided by the order dated 16.06.2026 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Headquarters, Gurugram, the present contempt petition is disposed of accordingly, with liberty to the petitioner to avail his remedies against the said order dated 16.06.2026 in accordance with law (if so advised); the State did not dispute this course.

¶6

Key takeaways

All pending application(s), if any, stand closed.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition before the High Court, Chandigarh concerning (i) the petitioner's Annual Confidential Report for 14.12.2022 to 31.03.2023, for which a direction had already been issued by the Director General of Police, Haryana, vide order dated 11.06.2026 (Annexure P-3), and (ii) non-action on the petitioner's representation dated 09.04.2026 against his premature retirement. At the hearing, the respondent-State, through Ms. Ambika Luthra, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, produced in Court the order dated 16.06.2026 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Headquarters, Gurugram, by which the issue of the petitioner's premature retirement stands decided. Counsel for the petitioner, having gone through that order, sought disposal of the contempt petition with liberty to avail remedies against the order dated 16.06.2026 in accordance with law (if so advised); learned State counsel did not dispute the course. The Court ordered accordingly and closed all pending application(s), if any.

Parmod Kumar v. Ajay Singhal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parmod Kumar v. Ajay Singhal

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

Case details

Similar cases

Gurpreet Kaur and Anr. Vs M/S Luxmi Plywood and Anr.

Virender Singh Vs Phoola Durani and Ors.

Chander Mohan Vs Vinay Bublani

Paramjit Singh Vs Sakatar Singh Bal, Dse (Se)

Balwinder Singh and Others Vs Manisha Rana

Mukesh Kumar Vs Pardeep Chouhan , Arcs Kurukshetra and Ors.