IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 111 Pardeep Kumar and another Anurag Commissioner Revenue, Department of Revenue and Rehabilitation, Govt. of Punjab and another CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) proceedings against the respondents for not complying the order dated 13.3.2024 (Annexure P CWP-5582 and another ” vide which the petition was disposed of with a direction “….to respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 03.1.2024, Annexure P as referred to by learned counsel for the petitioners, within a period of six months and if found entitled, necessary benefits be granted to them forthwith.” compliance of the order dated 13.3.2024 (Annexure P 23.7.2025 has been passed by respondent No.1 herein. Copy of the said order dated 23.7.2025 has been supplied by learned counsel for the COCP-1820-2025 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.1820 of 2025 (O & M) Date of decision : Pardeep Kumar and another Versus Anurag Verma, IAS, Additional Chief Secretary Commissioner Revenue, Department of Revenue and Rehabilitation, Govt. of Punjab and another CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Jatinderpal Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Saurav Verma, Addl. A.G. Punjab. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for not complying the order dated 13.3.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by a co-ordinate Bench 5582-2024 titled as “Pardeep Kumar and another vs. State of Punjab and another ” vide which the petition was disposed of with a direction “….to respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 03.1.2024, Annexure P-10 and decide the same taking note of the aforesaid judgment as referred to by learned counsel for the petitioners, within a period of six months and if found entitled, necessary benefits be granted to them forthwith.” It is submitted by learned counsel for the petition compliance of the order dated 13.3.2024 (Annexure P 23.7.2025 has been passed by respondent No.1 herein. Copy of the said order dated 23.7.2025 has been supplied by learned counsel for the 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1820 of 2025 (O & M) Date of decision :-06.08.2025 …..Petitioners Verma, IAS, Additional Chief Secretary-cum-Financial Commissioner Revenue, Department of Revenue and Rehabilitation, …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Jatinderpal Singh, Advocate Mr. Saurav Verma, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Prayer in this petition is for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for not complying the order dated ordinate Bench of this Court in 2024 titled as “Pardeep Kumar and another vs. State of Punjab and another ” vide which the petition was disposed of with a direction “….to respondent No.2 to consider the representation dated 03.1.2024, e same taking note of the aforesaid judgment as referred to by learned counsel for the petitioners, within a period of six months and if found entitled, necessary benefits be granted to them It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in compliance of the order dated 13.3.2024 (Annexure P-1) an order dated 23.7.2025 has been passed by respondent No.1 herein. Copy of the said order dated 23.7.2025 has been supplied by learned counsel for the VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.07 18.40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document respondents wherein, in para 7, it is stated as follows : rank, who were holding posts of Naib Tehsildars, were reverted, however, the said junior persons have filed the CWP Bala and others vs. State of Punjab”, wherein this Court vide order dated COCP-1820-2025 (O & M) respondents-State to learned counsel for the petitioner today in the Court, wherein, in para 7, it is stated as follows :- “7. Whereas, it is pertinent to mention here that the petitioners have relied upon the order dated 02.02.2000 passed by the Hon'ble High Court in CWP No. 16543 of 1998 Shingara Chand & Others vs. Punjab Water Supply and Sewerage Board (Board) & Others. In this case, primary grievance of the petitioners was that current Divisional Engineer (SDE) was assigned to Junior Engineers, even though the petitione senior in rank and seniority. Petitioners therein claimed that this is a violation of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution, as the Board ignored their entitlement and selected juniors arbitrarily. In this case, this Hon'ble High Court direc pass orders for giving Current post of SDE to the Petitioners therein and liberty was given to the Board to withdraw the Current Charge from the non-official respondents therein. In reference to this case, it is mad Department had already reverted all the junior officials to petitioners, who were holding post of Naib Tehsildars on Temporary/Ad dated 01.07.2025, which is issued vide Endst. No.14/15//2024-RE3(1)/8795 and presently, no junior to petitioners is working as Naib Tehsildar on Temporary/Ad Therefore, no claim of the petitioners sustain in reference to above order 02.02.2000.” It is admitted that the persons juniors to the petitioners in rank, who were holding posts of Naib Tehsildars, were reverted, however, the said junior persons have filed the CWP Bala and others vs. State of Punjab”, wherein this Court vide order dated 2 for the petitioner today in the Court, “7. Whereas, it is pertinent to mention here that the petitioners have relied upon the order dated 02.02.2000 passed by the Hon'ble High Court in CWP hingara Chand & Others vs. Punjab Water Supply and Sewerage Board (Board) & Others. In this case, primary grievance of the petitioners was that current-duty charge of Sub- Divisional Engineer (SDE) was assigned to Junior Engineers, even though the petitioners therein were senior in rank and seniority. Petitioners therein claimed that this is a violation of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution, as the Board ignored their entitlement and selected juniors arbitrarily. In this case, this Hon'ble High Court directed the Board to pass orders for giving Current-Duty Charge of the post of SDE to the Petitioners therein and liberty was given to the Board to withdraw the Current-Duty official respondents therein. In reference to this case, it is made clear that this Department had already reverted all the junior officials to petitioners, who were holding post of Naib Tehsildars on Temporary/Ad-hoc basis vide order dated 01.07.2025, which is issued vide Endst. RE3(1)/8795-8803 dated 02.07.2025 and presently, no junior to petitioners is working as Naib Tehsildar on Temporary/Ad-hoc basis. Therefore, no claim of the petitioners sustain in reference to above order 02.02.2000.” It is admitted that the persons juniors to the petitioners in the rank, who were holding posts of Naib Tehsildars, were reverted, however, the said junior persons have filed the CWP-19758-2025 titled as “Anju Bala and others vs. State of Punjab”, wherein this Court vide order dated VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.07 18.40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 01.8.2025 had stayed the reversion resultantly, the persons juniors to the present petitioners are still holding posts although the petitioners are seniors and therefore contempt is made out. It is also admitted by learned counsel for the petition previously the petitioners were granted personal hearing. allegedly juniors to the petitioners are continuing on the posts of Tehsildars only in pursuan ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP respondents in compliance of directions of this Court have passed the order dated 02.7.2025 whereby the juniors this Court. Speaking Or August 06 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No COCP-1820-2025 (O & M) 01.8.2025 had stayed the reversion of the said persons. It is submitted that resultantly, the persons juniors to the present petitioners are still holding posts although the petitioners are seniors and therefore contempt is made It is also admitted by learned counsel for the petition previously the petitioners were granted personal hearing. Heard. Perusal of the above facts clearly make allegedly juniors to the petitioners are continuing on the posts of Tehsildars only in pursuance to order dated ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-19758 respondents in compliance of directions of this Court have passed the order dated 02.7.2025 whereby the juniors were reverted, which stands stayed by rt. In view of the above, the present petition stands However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to challenge the Speaking Order dated 23.7.2025, as per law, Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands dispos 6, 2025 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 3 of the said persons. It is submitted that resultantly, the persons juniors to the present petitioners are still holding posts although the petitioners are seniors and therefore contempt is made It is also admitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that previously the petitioners were granted personal hearing. Perusal of the above facts clearly makes out that any persons allegedly juniors to the petitioners are continuing on the posts of Naib to order dated 01.8.2025 passed by co- 19758-2025. It is also clear that the respondents in compliance of directions of this Court have passed the order were reverted, which stands stayed by In view of the above, the present petition stands dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to challenge the if so advised. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.08.07 18.40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document