IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 103 COCP-2576-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 14.07.2026 Sahib Singh ...Petitioner Versus Jaspreet Singh Virmi and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Gurmej Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nirmal Preet Singh, DAG, Punjab. ***** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed for initiating proceedings against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for alleged wilful disobedience of order dated 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-1), passed by a coordinate Bench in CWP-3169-2026. 2. At the preliminary hearing, on an advance copy having been furnished, learned State counsel had put in appearance on 22.05.2026 and prayed for an adjournment to submit compliance affidavit and at his request, the matter was deferred. 3. On the deferred hearing, compliance affidavit was not filed and it was vehemently prayed on behalf of the respondents that they be granted another opportunity for doing the needful. They had also submitted to pay compensatory amount of Rs.15,000/-, as litigation expenses, to the petitioner. Acceding to the said request, the matter was SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.16 19:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-2576-2026 (O&M) -2- further deferred to 14.07.2026. 4. On the adjourned date, when the matter was taken up for hearing at its own turn, in the pre-lunch session, the following order was passed:- “This petition has been filed for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for alleged wilful disobedience of order dated 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) passed by a coordinate Bench in CWP-3169-2026. While disposing of the aforesaid matter, the following direction was issued: “Without evincing any opinion as regards the merits of the writ petition, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the competent authority, among the respondents, to take a final decision on the representation (supra) within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.” On 22.05.2026, learned State counsel had prayed for an adjournment to submit compliance report, which request was granted. However, on the adjourned date, the compliance affidavit was not filed and the following order was passed on 27.05.2026: “Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that vide order dated 04.02.2026 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the competent authority was directed to take a final decision on the representation (Annexure P-6). It is submitted that the said order was passed in the presence of the State Counsel. It is further submitted that when the said time elapsed, the present contempt petition was filed and this Court had granted time to the State counsel to file compliance report. Even today, neither compliance report has been submitted nor the order has been complied with. When this Court was about to proceed in the matter, learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently prayed for one last opportunity to comply with the order and has submitted that SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.16 19:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-2576-2026 (O&M) -3- for the inconvenience caused to the petitioner, the respondents would pay Rs.15,000/- as litigation expenses to the petitioner. Adjourned to 14.07.2026. It is made clear that in case the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 04.02.2026 is not complied with by the next date of hearing and the compliance report is not submitted and the amount of Rs.15,000/- as undertaken to be paid by the respondents, is not paid to the petitioner, then, for the further proceedings in the matter, the respondents are directed to be present through Video Conferencing on the next date of hearing.” Today also, neither the compliance affidavit has been filed nor the previous order dated 27.05.2026 has been complied with nor the alleged contemnor is present for the hearing. On a query of the Court, learned State counsel submits that he has no information as to why respondent No.1 is not present in Court or reason(s) for non-compliance of the previous order. As per his office brief, no person has come forward to report compliance of the aforesaid order. He further submits that on having attempted to contact respondent No.1, the calls went unanswered and have since not been responded to. In view of the above, let the presence of respondent No.1 be secured through bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.20,000/-. List on 30.07.2026.” 5. At this stage, before the above order could be signed, learned State counsel has made a mention to apprise the Court that the official concerned has come present and has revealed that he was on his way to the High Court and had got stuck in a traffic jam. Therefore, he SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.16 19:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-2576-2026 (O&M) -4- could not reach in time for the hearing. He further submits that his absence at the hearing was not intentional and was for reasons beyond his control. He profusely apologizes for inconvenience caused, and undertakes to be very careful in future. Thus, he prays that the matter be taken up again. 6. In view of the above, bailable warrants issued to secure the presence of the official concerned, are recalled. 7. Learned State counsel has filed compliance affidavit dated 14.07.2026 of Jaspreet Singh Vermi, Executive Engineer, Provincial Division, Public Works Department (B&R Branch), Gurdaspur, in the Court, which is taken on record and copy thereof has been furnished to learned counsel for the petitioner. Along with with the aforesaid compliance affidavit, a speaking order dated 10.07.2026 has been appended as Annexure R-3, purported to have been passed in deference to the order dated 04.02.2026 (Annexure P-1). Learned State counsel has also handed over a demand draft drawn in favour of the petitioner in the sum of Rs.15,000/-, in compliance of order dated 27.05.2026 passed by this Court in the present proceedings, a copy whereof has been retained on the file. 8. The aforesaid negotiable instrument has been received by learned counsel for the petitioner, on behalf of the petitioner. 9. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as substantial compliance of order dated 04.02.2026 has since been made, the grievance does not survive and hence, he prays for SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.16 19:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-2576-2026 (O&M) -5- withdrawal of the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail legal remedy against the speaking order dated 10.07.2026 (Annexure R- 3), in accordance with law, if required. 10. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. 11. Rule is discharged. (VIKAS SURI) July 14, 2026 JUDGE sumit.k Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether Reportable : Yes / No SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.16 19:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment