Contempt petition alleging violation of a writ court order directing payment to a contractor for five works. Compliance was effected, so the petitioner sought disposal. The court disposed of the contempt petition and discharged the rule.
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-937-2026 (O & M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
215
COCP No.937 of 2026 (O & M) Date of decision :-06.04.2026
M/s Surinder Kumar Contractor
…..Petitioner
Versus
Sh. Amit Talwar, IAS and others
…..Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:Mr. Amanveer Singh, Advo c ate for Mr. R.K. Girdhar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Deepanshu Mehta, Adv o cate for respondents No.1 to 3.
NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)
Present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 27.8.2025 (An n exure P-1) passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP - 19154-2025 titled as “M/s Surinder K umar Contractor vs. The Punj a b Health SystemCorporation and othe r s”, whereby the petition was disposed of on the basis of statemen t made by learned counsel for the respondents on the basis of Speaking Order No.PHSC/EE/PTA/202 5 /06 dated 18.8.2025 to the effect th a t the petitioner has been fou n d entitled to Rs.6,89,131/-, Rs.6,67,815/-, Rs.8,05,328/-, Rs.7,94,56 6 /- and Rs.17,76,963/- against five diffe r ent works as detailed in para 2 o f the Writ Petition. Learned counsel f or the respondents, on instruct i ons from Sh. Sanjay Jindal, Executiv e Engineer (Civil), Punjab He a lth System Corporation had
VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.07 19.19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
COCP-937-2026 (O & M) 2
stated th a t the aforesaid amount would b e paid to the petitioner within a period of 45 days from 27.8.2025, su b ject to clearance from third party audit.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits t h at the Writ Court order dated 27.8.2025 (Annexure P-1) has been co m plied by the respondent-a u thority, therefore, nothing survives in the present contempt peti t ion and the same may be disposed of.
In view of the submissions m ade by learned counsel for the petiti o ner, the present contempt petiti o n is disposed of . Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if an y , shall stands disposed of.
April 06, 2026 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) Vijay Asija JUDGE
Whether sp e aking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Re p ortable Yes / No
VIJAY ASIJA 2026.04.07 19.19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition remains necessary given that the writ court order dated 27.8.2025 has been complied with?
M/s Surinder Kumar Contractor
Sh. Amit Talwar, IAS
Nidhi Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
