IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 218 Smt. Amarjit Kaur Shri Kiran Avtar others CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) proceedings against the respondent(s) for not complying the order dated 18.7.2019 Court in CWP Punjab and others” whereby the respondents were directed decide the Legal Notice dated 25.4.2019 (annexure P speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case, after the d is found that the petitioner is entitled for any monetary benefit, the same shall also be released to her within a period of next three months….”. motion has not been issued in the matter. As per order sheet, since COCP-2080-2021 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.2080 of 2021 Date of decision : Smt. Amarjit Kaur Versus Shri Kiran Avtar Singh, Chief Secretary to Govt. of Punjab and CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA None for the petitioner. Mr. Manmeet Singh Teji, AAG Punjab. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent(s) for not complying the order 18.7.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by a co Court in CWP-19349-2019 titled as “Amarjit Kaur vs. The State of njab and others” whereby the respondents were directed decide the Legal Notice dated 25.4.2019 (annexure P speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case, after the d is found that the petitioner is entitled for any monetary benefit, the same shall also be released to her within a period of next three months….”. The matter pertains to the year 2021 and is still notice of motion has not been issued in the matter. As per order sheet, since 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2080 of 2021 (O & M) Date of decision :-19.08.2025 …..Petitioner Singh, Chief Secretary to Govt. of Punjab and …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Manmeet Singh Teji, AAG Punjab. Prayer in this petition is for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent(s) for not complying the order 1) passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Amarjit Kaur vs. The State of njab and others” whereby the respondents were directed “…to decide the Legal Notice dated 25.4.2019 (annexure P-7) by passing a speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In case, after the decision, it is found that the petitioner is entitled for any monetary benefit, the same shall also be released to her within a period of next three The matter pertains to the year 2021 and is still notice of motion has not been issued in the matter. As per order sheet, since VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.20 17.51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document the day of inception i.e. 24.8.2023 there was no representation on behalf of petitioner, therefore the matter was adjourned fu Even today there is no representation on behalf of petitioner. petitioner present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuab of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the petitioner has adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to August 19 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No COCP-2080-2021 (O & M) the day of inception i.e. 24.8.2023 there was no representation on behalf of petitioner, therefore the matter was adjourned fu Even today there is no representation on behalf of petitioner. A bare reading of the above facts shows that the petitioner has exhibited an utterly casual attitude in the pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuab of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the petitioner in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that neither the petitioner nor her counsel are seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss the same for non Ordered accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. 9, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 2 the day of inception i.e. 24.8.2023 there was no representation on behalf of petitioner, therefore the matter was adjourned further. Even today there is no representation on behalf of petitioner. A bare reading of the above facts shows that the exhibited an utterly casual attitude in the pursuit of the present litigation. It is to be appreciated that very valuable public time of the Court has been expended in affording opportunities to the in the interest of justice. On the other hand, the petitioner adopted an utterly casual and careless approach. It is clear that counsel are seriously interested in pursuing the present matter. Thus, this Court is left with no other the same for non-prosecution. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.20 17.51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document