COCP-1156 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 218 Seeshan Kumar and another Apneet Riyait and CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. order dated this Court in State of Punjab and others 2. submits that the aforesaid direction only the minimum pay in excess which is due to includes Grade Pay, Allowance etc. 1156-2024 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP Date of Decision: 04.09.2025 Seeshan Kumar and another Versus Apneet Riyait and others CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. PK Mutneja, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vishesh Bhatia and Ms. Harmanjot Kaur, Advocates for the petitioners. Mr. DV Sharma, Senior Advocate with Ms.Sunder Kumari, Advocate for the respondents. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 22.05.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by this Court in CWP-36576-2019 titled as ‘Seeshan Kumar and State of Punjab and others’, whereby it was directed as under “7. Respondents are directed to pay the salary to the petitioners at the rate of minimum pay post of Beldar on which they are working along with Dearness Allowance at the rate being paid to other employees. 8. This order shall be applicable from the date this Dearness Allowance was withdrawn by the respondents. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits that the aforesaid directions stands duly complied with as only the minimum pay-scale and dearness allowance in excess which is due to the petitioners has been paid to includes Grade Pay, Mobile Allowance, llowance etc., as is evident from the IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-1156-2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 04.09.2025 .… Petitioners .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. PK Mutneja, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vishesh Bhatia and Ms. Harmanjot Kaur, Advocates Mr. DV Sharma, Senior Advocate with Advocate for the respondents. Present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of 1) passed by a co-ordinate Bench of Seeshan Kumar and another vs. whereby it was directed as under:- Respondents are directed to pay the salary to the petitioners at the rate of minimum pay-scale attached to the post of Beldar on which they are working along with wance at the rate being paid to other This order shall be applicable from the date this Dearness Allowance was withdrawn by the respondents.” Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents s stands duly complied with as, not scale and dearness allowance but also the amount the petitioners has been paid to them which llowance, Medical Allowance, Washing as is evident from the statement (Annexure R-3/3). Present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of Bench of vs. Respondents are directed to pay the salary to the scale attached to the post of Beldar on which they are working along with wance at the rate being paid to other This order shall be applicable from the date this Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents not but also the amount which ashing RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.04 20:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. COCP-1156 Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents thus submits that nothing survives in the present petition. 3. the aforesaid facts, however, submi disposed of and in case of any discrepancy, liberty may be granted to the petitioners 4. passed in the present petition liberty aforesaid. 5. 6. 04.09.2025 rishu 1156-2024 (O&M) -2- Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents thus submits that nothing survives in the present petition. Learned Senior Counsel for the the aforesaid facts, however, submits that the instant petition may be disposed of and in case of any discrepancy, liberty may be granted to the to revive the present contempt petition. In view of the above, no further orders are required to be passed in the present petition and the same stands liberty aforesaid. Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 04.09.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents thus submits that nothing ounsel for the petitioners has not disputed ts that the instant petition may be disposed of and in case of any discrepancy, liberty may be granted to the to revive the present contempt petition. In view of the above, no further orders are required to be the same stands disposed of, with the Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Yes/No Learned Senior Counsel for the respondents thus submits that nothing petitioners has not disputed ts that the instant petition may be disposed of and in case of any discrepancy, liberty may be granted to the In view of the above, no further orders are required to be with the RISHU KATARIA 2025.09.04 20:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.