COCP-646-2022 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 104 COCP-646-2022 Date of Decision: 10.09.2025 Kulwant Singh ......Petitioner Vs. Rahul Bhandari, IAS and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. N.P.S. Mann, Advocate and for the petitioner. Mr. Animesh Sharma, Addl.A.G. Punjab **** SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (Oral) 1. The present contempt petition has been filed for deliberate and intentional disobedience of order dated 02.12.2021 passed by this Court in CWP-24452-2021, whereby, the directions were issued to the respondent authorities to consider the legal notice dated 29.09.2021 as representation, which was placed on record as Annexure P-1 in writ petition of the petitioner and to decide the same in accordance with law by passing a speaking order, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 2. Learned State counsel submits that in compliance of order dated 02.12.2021, compliance affidavit of Paramjit Singh, Director, Rural Development and Panchayat, Punjab dated 14.11.2024 along with Annexure R-1, has already been filed before the registry, which is taken on record. SAHIL 2025.09.12 19:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-646-2022 -2- 4. The relevant portion of compliance affidavit of Paramjit Singh, Director, Rural Development and Panchayat, Punjab dated 14.11.2024 , is reproduced as under:- “3. That it is respectfully submitted that in Compliance of order dated 02.12.2021, the legal notice given by the petitioner was duly considered and the same has been decided vide order dated 11.11.2024. The copy of the order is annexed herewith as Annexure R-1. However, the deponent tenders unconditional and unqualified apology for the delay.” 4. A perusal of above shows that order dated 02.12.2021 passed by this Court in CWP-24452-2021, has been complied with by passing a speaking order dated 11.11.2024. This fact is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. In view of the above, the contempt is purged and rule is discharged. 6. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 7. Needless to say that the petitioner can avail the remedy as is available to him in accordance with law to challenge the speaking order dated 11.11.2024. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE September 10th 2025 Sahil Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No SAHIL 2025.09.12 19:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document