IN THE HIGH (105) Prem Vineet Kumar Garg, IFS and another CORAM : Present: AMARJOT BHATTI, J. 1. Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Ac the order dated 24.12.2025 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.29241 of 2025 (Annexure P others. 2. record the judgments passed in LPA No.1810 of 2025 and LPA No.2017 of 2026, which are taken on record. Copies thereof have been supplied to learned counsel representing the petitioner. 3. Petition No.29241 of 2025 (Annexure P LPA No.2017 of 2026 titled which in lead IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus Vineet Kumar Garg, IFS and another CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Present: Mr. Yash Kaushik, Mr. Tarun Kaushik, Mr. Vinamar Jain, Advocate Mr. Anuj Garg, DAG, Haryana AMARJOT BHATTI, J.(Oral) Petitioner-Prem has filed contempt petition under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Ac the order dated 24.12.2025 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.29241 of 2025 (Annexure P-1) titled as “Prem vs. State of Haryana and others. Learned counsel representing the State has placed on record the judgments passed in LPA No.1810 of 2025 and LPA No.2017 of 2026, which are taken on record. Copies thereof have been supplied to learned counsel representing the petitioner. The judgment dated 24.12.2025 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.29241 of 2025 (Annexure P LPA No.2017 of 2026 titled “State of Haryana and others vs. Prem which has been disposed of on 22.07.2026 in terms of the judgment lead case i.e. LPA No.1810 of 2025 titled COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.2653 of 2026 Decided on :03.09.2026 ……Petitioner …Respondents HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI Yash Kaushik, Mr. Tarun Kaushik, Mr. Vinamar Jain, Advocates, for the petitioner. Mr. Anuj Garg, DAG, Haryana Prem has filed contempt petition under Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for violating the order dated 24.12.2025 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.29241 of Prem vs. State of Haryana and Learned counsel representing the State has placed on record the judgments passed in LPA No.1810 of 2025 and LPA No.2017 of 2026, which are taken on record. Copies thereof have been supplied to learned counsel representing the petitioner. dated 24.12.2025 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.29241 of 2025 (Annexure P-1) was challenged by filing State of Haryana and others vs. Prem”, disposed of on 22.07.2026 in terms of the judgment i.e. LPA No.1810 of 2025 titled “AAS Mohammad and Prem has filed contempt petition under t, 1971, for violating the order dated 24.12.2025 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.29241 of Prem vs. State of Haryana and Learned counsel representing the State has placed on record the judgments passed in LPA No.1810 of 2025 and LPA No.2017 of 2026, which are taken on record. Copies thereof have dated 24.12.2025 passed in Civil Writ by filing , disposed of on 22.07.2026 in terms of the judgment NARESH KUMAR 2026.09.03 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP No.2653 of 2026 -2- others vs. State of Haryana and others” on 23.04.2026. The operative part of the order runs as under:- “9. In that view of the matter, all the appeals are disposed of with a direction upon the State of Haryana/its Bodies/Corporation/Nigam to accord fresh consideration to the claim of employees involved in this batch of cases by passing a speaking order in respect of their claim for regularization within a period of six months. The judgment of the learned Single Judge under appeal stands modified in the light of the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Singh (supra). Till an appropriate order in respect of claim of each of the employees is passed, status quo as exists today would be maintained. It goes without saying that the claim of regularization based on policy of 2011 will also be accorded consideration keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Singh (supra) and the order impugned in the present batch of appeals/writ petitions would not come in the way of fresh consideration of the claim of employees for regularization. 10. In order to facilitate a fresh consideration of claim of the individual employee, we direct each employee to submit a comprehensive representation to the department along with a copy of this order within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.” 4. In the light of this, present contempt petition does not lie and no further action is required. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of. 5. Petitioner will avail remedy as directed to him in LPA No.2017 of 2026, decided on 22.07.2026. 6. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. (AMARJOT BHATTI ) 03.09.2026 JUDGE nt Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No NARESH KUMAR 2026.09.03 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document