IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 112 Jaid Mohd. Sh. Pardeep Kumar, IAS, Haryana CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) proceedings against the respondent for not complying the order dated 06.3.2025 Court in CWP and others” vide which the petition was disposed of on the basis of statement made by learned counsel for the State to the effect that “…the pending representation, dated 08.1.2025, will be decided by the second respondent/Director, Elementary Education, by pa speaking/reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of three months said submissions made in the petition and submits that in pursuance of COCP-4559-2025 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.4559 of 2025 Date of decision : Jaid Mohd. Versus Sh. Pardeep Kumar, IAS, Director, Elementary Education CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. M.D. Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Priyavrat Parashar, AAG, Haryana NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for not complying the order dated 06.3.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by a co Court in CWP-6247-2025 titled as “Jaid Mohd. vs. State of Haryana others” vide which the petition was disposed of on the basis of statement made by learned counsel for the State to the effect that “…the pending representation, dated 08.1.2025, will be decided by the second respondent/Director, Elementary Education, by pa speaking/reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of three months”. Learned counsel for the respondent counters the above said submissions made in the petition and submits that in pursuance of 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 4559 of 2025 (O & M) Date of decision :-08.09.2025 …..Petitioner Director, Elementary Education …..Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Priyavrat Parashar, AAG, Haryana. Prayer in this petition is for initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent for not complying the order dated 1) passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Jaid Mohd. vs. State of Haryana others” vide which the petition was disposed of on the basis of statement made by learned counsel for the State to the effect that “…the pending representation, dated 08.1.2025, will be decided by the second respondent/Director, Elementary Education, by passing a speaking/reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of Learned counsel for the respondent counters the above said submissions made in the petition and submits that in pursuance of VIJAY ASIJA 2025.09.10 20.33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document the order dated 06.3.2025 (Annexure P has been passed whereby the petitioner has been notionally promoted and even notional benefits have been accorded to the petitioner no cause survives in the present petition. the learned counsel for the respondent thereof is supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. Registry to tag/paginate the same at appropriate place in the paper order dated 29.8.2025 is not a proper order and has not been passed within three months as directed. dated 06.3.2025 (Annexure P been passed by the respondent, no further directions are required to be passed; and dated 29.8.2025, he is at liberty to challenge the same in accord with law. September 0 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No COCP-4559-2025 (O & M) the order dated 06.3.2025 (Annexure P- has been passed whereby the petitioner has been notionally promoted and even notional benefits have been accorded to the petitioner no cause survives in the present petition. Copy of the aforesaid order dated 29.8.2025 the learned counsel for the respondent-State is taken on record. Copy thereof is supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. Registry to tag/paginate the same at appropriate place in the paper It is submitted by learned counsel for order dated 29.8.2025 is not a proper order and has not been passed within three months as directed. Heard. In view of the facts noted above dated 06.3.2025 (Annexure P-1), an Office Order dated 29.8.2025 h been passed by the respondent, no further directions are required to be passed; and the present petition is hereby Needless to say, if the petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 29.8.2025, he is at liberty to challenge the same in accord Rule stands discharged. Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. September 08, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 2 -1) an order dated 29.8.2025 has been passed whereby the petitioner has been notionally promoted and even notional benefits have been accorded to the petitioner; thus, Copy of the aforesaid order dated 29.8.2025 produced by State is taken on record. Copy thereof is supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. Registry to tag/paginate the same at appropriate place in the paper-book. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that order dated 29.8.2025 is not a proper order and has not been passed above that in pursuane to order 1), an Office Order dated 29.8.2025 has been passed by the respondent, no further directions are required to be the present petition is hereby dismissed. Needless to say, if the petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 29.8.2025, he is at liberty to challenge the same in accordance Pending application(s), if any, shall stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2025.09.10 20.33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document COCP-4559-2025 (O & M) 3 VIJAY ASIJA 2025.09.10 20.33 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document