IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 106 Manipal Singh Anurag Rastogi, Chief CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) proceedings the order dated Bench of this Court in as “Subhash Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others”. order dated 21.5.2025 passed by co COCP No.1789 of 2025 titled as “Ramkaran and others vs. Anurag Rastogi and others” statement made by learned counsel for the State to the effect that “….the petitioner soule be paid the revised pension in terms of the revision carried out in pursuance of the order dated 03. COCP-2666-2025 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.2666 of 2025 Date of decision : Manipal Singh Versus Anurag Rastogi, Chief Secretary, Haryana and others CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Mona Yadav, Advocate for Mr. Ranjit Singh Kalra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dushyant Saharan, AAG, Haryana. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that proceedings be initiated against the respondent the order dated 14.1.2025 (Annexure P- Bench of this Court in CWP Nos.570, 595, 688 and 698 of 2025 Subhash Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others”. Learned counsel for the respondent order dated 21.5.2025 passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in COCP No.1789 of 2025 titled as “Ramkaran and others vs. Anurag Rastogi and others” whereby the petition was disposed of on the statement made by learned counsel for the State to the effect that “….the petitioner soule be paid the revised pension in terms of the revision carried out in pursuance of the order dated 03. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2666 of 2025 (O & M) Date of decision :-27.05.2025 …..Petitioner Secretary, Haryana and others …..Respondents HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA s. Mona Yadav, Advocate for Mr. Ranjit Singh Kalra, Advocate Mr. Dushyant Saharan, AAG, Haryana. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that contempt against the respondent(s) for not complying -1) passed by a co-ordinate CWP Nos.570, 595, 688 and 698 of 2025 titled Subhash Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others”. Learned counsel for the respondent-State refers to the ordinate Bench of this Court in COCP No.1789 of 2025 titled as “Ramkaran and others vs. Anurag whereby the petition was disposed of on the statement made by learned counsel for the State to the effect that “….the petitioner soule be paid the revised pension in terms of the revision carried out in pursuance of the order dated 03.8.2023 from VIJAY ASIJA 2025.05.29 11.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document the date the stay was granted in the present case i.e. 21.2.2025 and the same would be done subject to the further orders passed in CWP 4971-2025. It is submitted that the arrears on the said account would be released within a period of three submitted that the release of the said amount and the payment every month in pursuance of the orders dated 03.8.2023 should not be construed as an estoppels against the respondents from opposing the writ petition.” of the said order dated 21.5.2025, referred above, necessary compliance would be made within three weeks from today. does not press the present petiti contempt petition in case the abovesaid undertaking is not complied with by the respondent. May 27, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No COCP-2666-2025 (O & M) the date the stay was granted in the present case i.e. 21.2.2025 and the same would be done subject to the further orders passed in CWP 2025. It is submitted that the arrears on the said account would be released within a period of three weeks from today. It is however submitted that the release of the said amount and the payment every month in pursuance of the orders dated 03.8.2023 should not be construed as an estoppels against the respondents from opposing the writ petition.” Learned counsel for the State of the said order dated 21.5.2025, referred above, necessary compliance would be made within three weeks from today. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition any further. Dismissed as not pressed. Liberty is granted to the petitioner(s) to revive the contempt petition in case the abovesaid undertaking is not complied with by the respondent. Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, shall , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 2 the date the stay was granted in the present case i.e. 21.2.2025 and the same would be done subject to the further orders passed in CWP- 2025. It is submitted that the arrears on the said account would weeks from today. It is however submitted that the release of the said amount and the payment every month in pursuance of the orders dated 03.8.2023 should not be construed as an estoppels against the respondents from opposing the counsel for the State undertakes that in terms of the said order dated 21.5.2025, referred above, necessary compliance would be made within three weeks from today. In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner on any further. Liberty is granted to the petitioner(s) to revive the contempt petition in case the abovesaid undertaking is not complied Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.05.29 11.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document