Sarla Devi And Others vs Prashant Kumar Aggarwal And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1153 P&H

125         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH

                                 COCP-252-2022
                                 Date of Decision : 03.03.2022


Sarla Devi and others                                     ...Petitioners


            Versus

Prashant Kumar Aggarwal and others                        ....Respondents


Coram :     Hon'ble Mr. Justice B.S. Walia


Present :   Mr. Sahil Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

            Mr. Pawan Kumar Longia, AAG, Haryana.

            ***

B.S. Walia, J. (Oral)

1. Prayer in the petition is for initiating proceedings against the

respondent for intentional and willful defiance of order Annexure P/1 dated

29.10.2020, in CWP-11917-2020 as well as order, Annexure P/2 dated

15.11.2021 in LPA-32-2021.

2. A perusal of orders Annexures P/1 and P/2 reveals that CWP-

15746-2020 was partly allowed and the respondents were directed to

include the additional marks admissible to the petitioners as per their

entitlement, for having undergone relevant Computer/Training Courses

exceeding duration of 20 weeks in terms of Rule 13.07 (4)(II)(9) of the

Punjab Police Rules, 1934 for the purpose of considering their eligibility for

the Lower School Course 2018 and in case of addition of marks, any of the

petitioners crossed the Bench-mark, such petitioner was ordered to be

deputed/permitted to join the said course immediately, if feasible, or

otherwise for the very next similar course to follow. LPA-32- 2021 filed by 1 of 2

the State of Haryana against the decision in CWP-15746-2020 was partly

allowed by holding the benefit allowed vide impugned judgment and decree

to be admissible only to the petitioners in the said writ petition.

3. Learned Counsel contends that the instant petition was filed on

account of failure of the respondents to do the needful.

4. At the outset, learned DAG, Haryana, has produced copy of

order dated 03.03.2022, allowing the benefits to the petitioners as per

entitlement in terms of order in CWP-15746-2020 and LPA-32- 2021. The

same is taken on record. Copy thereof supplied to learned counsel for the

petitioners, who on perusal of the same states that in the circumstances, the

petitioners are not interested in pursuing the contempt petition and the same

may be disposed of such.

5. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel.

6. Admittedly, orders dated 29.10.2020 in CWP-11917-2020 and

dated 15.11.2021 in LPA-32-2021 have been complied with and the

petitioners granted benefit as per entitlement in terms of the aforementioned

orders.

7. In the light of position noted above, as well as statement of

learned counsel for the petitioner, no action under the Contempt of Courts

Act, 1971, is called for against the respondents. Accordingly, the contempt

petition is disposed of as such.

8. Rule discharged.

                                                           (B.S. Walia)
                                                             Judge
03.03.2022
ps

             Whether speaking/ reasoned        :      Yes/No
             Whether reportable                :      Yes/No

                                2 of 2