IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 105 COCP-2605-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 08.07.2026 Jatinder Kumar ...Petitioner Versus Atul Kumar and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Saurabh Bainsla, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) 1. Prayer in the present petition is for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for alleged wilful disobedience of order dated 06.04.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed in CWP-32780-2025, the operative part of which reads as under:- “12. The respondent is of the opinion that petitioner is liable to pay tax, interest and penalty as per Rule 33E of 1993 Rules. Contention of respondent is misconceived. It is only Rule 33E(1) which deals with sale of Government vehicles. It provides that if vehicles bearing registration mark “GV” series or preferential marks as defined in Rules 33B & 33C are auctioned, the registration mark shall be surrendered to transport department and an alternative registration mark shall be assigned to such vehicle. The conjoint reading of terms & conditions of the auction notice and Rule 33E reveals that registration mark in question was required to be surrendered and authorities were supposed to issue alternative SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.10 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-2605-2026 (O&M) -2- registration mark. The petitioner or any other bidder was not bound to pay charges and retain preferential number existing on the vehicle sold. It was duty of the respondents to arrange alternative number. The petitioner is not interested to retain said number, thus, it would go back to transport department. He is simply asking NOC to get his vehicle registered with Licensing Authority at Chandigarh. He can be asked to pay charges for NOC but not taxes payable for registration of a vehicle. 13. In the wake of above discussion and findings, the instant petition deserves to be allowed and accordingly allowed.” 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the present petition with liberty to avail his alternative remedy in the facts and circumstances narrated in the petition. 3. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid.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