CWP-28225-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 103 COCP-187-2026 in CWP-28225-2025 Date of decision: 27.07.2026 Inderjeet Singla and others ..…Petitioners Versus Alok Shekhar, IAS and others ..…Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER ***** Present: Mr. Supinder Singh Sohi, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Harinder Pal Singh Ishar, Addl. AG, Punjab Mr. L. S. Sidhu, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ***** HARSH BUNGER J. (ORAL) 1. Present contempt petition has been filed alleging non- compliance of order dated 22.09.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by this Court in CWP-28225-2025, wherein the following directions were issued:- “11. Consequently, the present writ petition is allowed. The respondent/Corporation is directed to fix the pay of the petitioners strictly in terms of the applicable Rules as on the date of their appointment, and to release the consequential benefits including arrears within a period of three months from date of receipt of certified copy of this order.” 2. In the present contempt petition, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed an order dated 29.05.2026, the relevant extract of which reads as under:- “[5] In view of the above, the petitioner was appointed as Clerk and was thus entitled to pay band of 10300-34800 with the Pay Grade of 3200 and initial pay of Rs.13,500/-. DINESH 2026.07.28 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28225-2025 -2- [6] Despite respondent No.1 having been called in person in the contempt proceedings and there being a specific order passed by the Writ Court, Order dated 27.05.2026 has been passed wherein the petitioner has been held to be entitled to pay scale of 5910-20200+1900 and his initial pay has been fixed @ Rs.5910/-. [7] At this stage, Ms. Manisha Rana, IAS, MD PRTC has joined through V.C. She submits that the order dated 27.05.2026 shall be withdrawn and a fresh order shall be passed on or before the next date of hearing, fixed as 01.07.2026.” 3. It appears that the incumbent officer, namely, Manisha Rana, Managing Director, PEPSU Road Transport Corporation (PRTC), Patiala, challenged the order dated 29.05.2026 by filing an appeal (LPA No.1750- 2026), wherein the following order dated 06.07.2026 has been passed:- “Learned Advocate General, Punjab, has urged that contempt court has travelled beyond the direction passed by writ court. He submits that by order dated 22.09.2025, writ court directed the corporation to fix pay of the writ petitioners strictly in terms of the applicable rules as on the date of their appointment, but vide impugned order, contempt court has held that writ petitioners to be entitled to pay band of Rs.10,300- 34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.3200/- and an initial pay of Rs.13,500/-. Issue notice of motion restricted to contesting respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. Supinder Singh Sohi, Advocate has put in appearance on their behalf and has filed Memorandum of Appearance, which is taken on record. He points out that appellant had made a statement before the contempt court as reflected in the impugned order, that order dated 27.05.2026, whereby pay of writ petitioners had been fixed, would be withdrawn and a fresh order shall be passed. DINESH 2026.07.28 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-28225-2025 -3- Faced with this, learned Advocate General, Punjab, states that a fresh order shall be passed and produced before the contempt court within a fortnight. List on 17.08.2026. Till the next date of hearing, observations made by the contempt court in para 05 of the impugned order shall be kept in abeyance.” 4. In compliance of the above extracted order dated 06.07.2026, learned counsel for the respondents have handed over a copy of fresh order dated 25.07.2026 in Court today, which is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. A copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. While referring to the aforesaid order dated 25.07.2026, learned counsel for the respondents submit that the directions issued by the LPA Bench, vide order dated 06.07.2026, stand complied with. 6. In the aforementioned circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the fact that LPA No.1750-2026, is pending therefore, the instant contempt petition be disposed of as not pressed at this stage with liberty to seek revival (if need so arises) after the decision of the aforesaid LPA No.1750-2026. 7. Ordered accordingly. 8. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. 27.07.2026 (HARSH BUNGER) dinesh JUDGE 1. Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable : Yes/No DINESH 2026.07.28 16:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document