Dismissed¶26

Vijay Singh v. Akash Paul and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Jan 2026COCP/515/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; COCP-515-2021 (O&M); decided 19.01.2026 by Sudeepti Sharma J. (oral). Vijay Singh v. Mr. Akash Paul and others. Civil contempt alleged for disobedience of Division Bench order dated 30.09.2019 in LPA-794-2016 (appeals dismissed; reinstatement with continuity without back wages; recovery of withdrawn compensation in easy instalments). Court found no contempt made out; contempt petition dismissed; pending applications disposed of. Keywords: contempt, disobedience, LPA, reinstatement, back wages, compensation, instalments, salary deduction.

What did the court decide?

On a perusal of the Division Bench order dated 30.09.2019 in LPA-794-2016, no contempt is made out. ¶24

Vijay Singh Vs Akash Paul and Ors. — Punjab & Haryana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

COCP-515-2025 (O&M) -1-

¶2

212-2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

COCP-515-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.01.2026

Vijay Singh

......Petitioner

Vs.

Mr. Akash Paul and others

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶11

Present : Mr. Gurinder Pal Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Vineet Jakhar, Advocate and Mr. Mohit Thakur, Advocate, for the respondents.

¶13

¶14

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (ORAL)

¶15

The present contempt petition has been filed for deliberate and intentional disobedience of order dated 30.09.2019 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA-794-2016, whereby the following order was

¶16

passed:-

¶17

“17. In the present case, the workman- respondent No.2 has given up claim for back wages. Only reinstatement with continuity of service but without back wages has been directed by the Ld. Single Judge.

¶18

18. We find no illegality or perversity in the aforesaid order warranting interference. This appeals are accordingly dismissed.

¶19

19. During the pendency of these appeals this Court had directed the appellant to deposit some compensation

¶20

VIRENDRA SINGH ADHIKARI 2026.01.21 19:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

COCP-515-2025 (O&M) -2-

¶22

with the Executing Authority and respondent No.2 - the workman was given liberty to withdraw the same. If the compensation has been withdrawn by the workman, the same may be recovered by the appellant in easy instalments.”

¶23

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as per directions given by the Division Bench of this Court, the petitioner, who had withdrawn the compensation, was to pay the same to the respondentcompany, which is till date not paid, whereas learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the amount mentioned by the Division Bench is being deducted by the respondents from the salary of the petitioner.

¶24