COCP-2290-2025 [1] 102-C IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-2290-2025 Date of decision: 11.08.2025 Ram Singh ...Petitioner Versus Pardeep Mehra and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL Present: Mr. Vishal Sodhi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajinder Sharma, Advocate for the respondents. **** VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL) 1. This is a Contempt Petition filed under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for willful and intentional disobedience of the order dated 19.09.2024 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that all the directions passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court have been duly complied with and the amounts as stated in the operative part of the order have been paid to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner still has grievance left inasmuch as the Coordinate Bench of this PAWAN KUMAR 2025.08.13 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document COCP-2290-2025 [2] Court had directed the respondents to also pay 50% back wages as ordered by the Labour Court. It is submitted that quantification of 50% back wages should be done by including revision in the said back wages from time to time. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the said prayer and has submitted that there is no such direction in the judgment dated 19.09.2024. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the same, the present contempt petition be disposed of but liberty be granted to the petitioner to move an appropriate application or to institute appropriate proceedings in accordance with law for redressal of the abovesaid grievance. 6. In view of the above, the present contempt petition is disposed of with liberty aforesaid. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not opined on the merits of the prayer of the petitioner and it would be open to both the parties to raise the pleas as are available to them in the proceedings proposed to be instituted by the petitioner. 11.08.2025 (VIKAS BAHL) Pawan JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether reportable:- Yes/No PAWAN KUMAR 2025.08.13 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document