Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2026 DAILYLAW 28480 (PNJ)

VISHAN SACHEDVA v. VIJAY SINGH DAHIYA AND ANOTHER

COCP/1510/2026 · 2026-07-08

Vikas Suri

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 102 COCP-1510-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 08.07.2026 Vishan Sachdeva ...Petitioner Versus Vijay Singh Dahiya and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Shivam Gupta, Advocate for Mr. N.C. Manchanda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ashish Yadav, Addl. AG, Haryana. ***** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for alleged wilful disobedience of order dated 22.04.2022 (Annexure P-1) passed in CWP-10569-2021, the operative part of which reads as under:- “This is a petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to reimburse the medical amount, Leave Travel Concession (LTC), to count the service of the petitioner and to affix the revised pension as well as pay the arrears in the revised pay scale along with interest @ 18% per annum, with certain other prayers made in the present petition. Learned State counsel submits that the amount of medical reimbursement and the other reliefs as claimed in the writ petition, stand granted to the SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.10 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-1510-2026 (O&M) -2- petitioner. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as infructuous. Ordered accordingly.” 2. Status report by way of affidavit dated 07.07.2026 of Bijender Singh, Principal, Government Girls Higher Secondary School Ismailabad, District Kurukshetra, (respondent No.3) has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 by learned State counsel in Court today. The same is taken on record. A copy thereof stands furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner is at pains to point out any direction, order or undertaking recorded in the order dated 22.04.2022 (Annexure P-1) that would warrant the invocation of contempt jurisdiction of this Court. 4. In view of the above, he prays for withdrawal of the present petition with liberty to approach the learned single Judge by way of an appropriate application. 5. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. (VIKAS SURI) July 08, 2026 JUDGE sumit.k Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether Reportable : Yes / No SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.10 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment