Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18006 (PNJ)

JASWINDER SINGH v. RAJI P. SHRIVASTAVA AND ORS

COCP/405/2025 · 2025-02-11

Harkesh Manuja

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

216 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA JASWINDER SINGH RAJI P. SHRIVASTAVA AND ORS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Mr. Vishnav Gandhi, D Ms. Swati Dayalan, Advocate for respondent No.4. HARKESH MANUJA Learned counsel for respondent Vipin Kumar, Sr. Assistant, Department of Social Security Woman and Child Development refers to an order dated 10.02.2025 to submit that the retiral benefits of the petitioners have been calculated along with interest and the necessary release thereof shall be made within a period of one week from today. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petitio Dismissed as not pressed. Rule discharged. However, aforementioned period, as per the undertaking, the petitioner would be at liberty to seek revival the erring/concerned Officer would be liable to pay additional sum of Rs.50,000/- as costs from his/her own pocket in favour of the petitioner towards litigation expenses, immediately, i.e. on the first date of listing of revival application. 11.02.2025 Tejwinder IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: JASWINDER SINGH Versus RAJI P. SHRIVASTAVA AND ORS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Ranjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vishnav Gandhi, DAG, Punjab. Ms. Swati Dayalan, Advocate for respondent No.4. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for respondent Vipin Kumar, Sr. Assistant, Department of Social Security Woman and Child Development refers to an order dated 10.02.2025 to submit that benefits of the petitioners have been calculated along with interest and the necessary release thereof shall be made within a period of one week from today. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition. Dismissed as not pressed. Rule discharged. However, in case the needful is not done within the aforementioned period, as per the undertaking, the petitioner would be at liberty to seek revival of the contempt petition the erring/concerned Officer would be liable to pay additional sum of as costs from his/her own pocket in favour of the petitioner towards litigation expenses, immediately, i.e. on the first date of listing application. Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-405-2025 Date of Decision: February 11, 2025 ........Petitioner ........Respondents HARKESH MANUJA , Advocate for the petitioner. AG, Punjab. Ms. Swati Dayalan, Advocate for respondent No.4. Learned counsel for respondents on instructions from Mr. Vipin Kumar, Sr. Assistant, Department of Social Security Woman and Child Development refers to an order dated 10.02.2025 to submit that benefits of the petitioners have been calculated along with interest and the necessary release thereof shall be made within a In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner in case the needful is not done within the aforementioned period, as per the undertaking, the petitioner would be of the contempt petition and in that eventuality, the erring/concerned Officer would be liable to pay additional sum of as costs from his/her own pocket in favour of the petitioner towards litigation expenses, immediately, i.e. on the first date of listing (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Yes/No 2025 February 11, 2025 on instructions from Mr. Vipin Kumar, Sr. Assistant, Department of Social Security Woman and Child Development refers to an order dated 10.02.2025 to submit that benefits of the petitioners have been calculated along with interest and the necessary release thereof shall be made within a In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner in case the needful is not done within the aforementioned period, as per the undertaking, the petitioner would be and in that eventuality, the erring/concerned Officer would be liable to pay additional sum of as costs from his/her own pocket in favour of the petitioner towards litigation expenses, immediately, i.e. on the first date of listing TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.02.14 09:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document