M/S CHARDIKLA STONE CRUSHER v. JASPREET TALWAR IAS AND ANOTHER
COCP/5673/2025 · 2026-01-09
Nidhi Gupta
Contempt Petitionbody2024
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2024 DAILYLAW 2165 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2024 DAILYLAW 2165 (PNJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN TH 203-I
M/s Chard
Smt. Jaspr Punjab
CORAM:
Present:-
NIDHI GU
violation of Division Chardikla interim ord the same D Stone Crus
order was another Di 2024 titled others” vid COCP-5673-2025 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR
COCP No.5673 o
Date of decision Chardikla Stone Crusher Versus Jaspreet Talwar, IAS, Additional C
AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI
Mr. Tushaar Madaan, Advocat for the petitioner. Mr. Amtiaz Sandhu, AAG, Pu Mr. Narendra Kumar, SDO, D Geology Nangal Sub Division HI GUPTA J. (Oral) Present contempt petition tion of interim order dated 03.9.2025 Bench of this Court in CWP dikla Stone Crusher vs. State of Pun im order was granted in terms of order ame Division Bench in CWP-24020- e Crusher vs. State of Punjab and oth r was granted in terms of order da er Division Bench in CWP Nos.293 titled as “M/s Jai Ambey Stone Crus rs” vide which it was opined that “…. 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH 5673 of 2025 (O & M) cision :-09.01.2026 …..Petitioner onal Chief Secretary to Govt. of …..Respondent E NIDHI GUPTA dvocate G, Punjab assisted by Drainage-cum-Mining and vision. ition has been filed alleging .2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by a WP-21086-2025 titled as “M/s of Punjab and others”, whereby f order dated 20.8.2025 passed by -2025 titled as “M/s Jai Mata nd others”, in which also interim er dated 28.10.2024 passed by os.29380 to 29382 and 29389 of e Crusher vs. State of Punjab and
“…..In our considered opinion, VIJAY ASIJA 2026.01.12 18.20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
the action apply for direct that necessary portal…..”
submits tha been comp be permitt
January 0 Vijay Asija
Whether spea Whether Repo
COCP-5673-2025 (O & M) tion of the respondents in not perm for renewal of registration is not that the petitioner(s) be permitte ary fees and the respondents-State …..”. At the very outset, learned its that the Writ Court order dated 03. complied with by the respondent(s)/a rmitted to withdraw the present contem Permitted to do so. Dismissed as withdrawn. Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, ary 09, 2026
speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No
2 permitting the petitioner(s) to not justified. Accordingly, we itted to apply on deposit of State shall open the necessary arned counsel for the petitioner ted 03.9.2025 (Annexure P-1) has nt(s)/authority, therefore, he may contempt petition. if any, shall stand(s) disposed of.
( NIDHI GUPTA )
JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.01.12 18.20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document