Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7626 (UTT)

SUKHVINDER SINGH v. VINEET JOSHI

CLCON/128/2026 · 2026-07-06

Pankaj Purohit

Contempt Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

UKHC010049012026 2026:UHC:5425 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS CLCON No.128 of 2026 Sukhvinder Singh ……….Petitioner Versus Vineet Joshi ……….Respondent Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. B.D. Pande, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India with Mr. Saurav Adhikari, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the Union of India/respondent-contemnor. 3. This contempt petition has been filed alleging willful and deliberate contempt of this Court’s order dated 21.11.2025, passed in WPPIL No.74 of 2025, Sukhwinder Singh Vs. Union of India, whereby the Writ Court has been pleased to consider the writ petition as a representation and directed the respondent in writ petition to decide the same on merits, in accordance with law, within a stipulated time. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent-contemnor has filed a compliance affidavit and annexed order dated 15.04.2026, whereby representation of the petitioner has been decided. 5. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner is not satisfied with the decision taken by the respondent-contemnor in the representation of the petitioner. 6. Be that as it may. The direction issued by the UKHC010049012026 2026:UHC:5425 Writ Court has now been complied with and if the petitioner has got any grievance against the order passed by the respondent-contemnor no.1, he may avail legal remedy available to him under the law. 7. Accordingly contempt petition is hereby closed. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 06.07.2026 SK