Ajit Singh vs Suresh Kumar Tomar
2026 Latest Caselaw 906 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Ajit Singh vs Suresh Kumar Tomar on 10 February, 2026

Author: Alok Kumar Verma

Bench: Alok Kumar Verma

                                                      2026:UHC:737



   IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
              AT NAINITAL
     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
                      10th FEBRUARY, 2026

       CIVIL CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 267 OF 2025

Ajit Singh                                      ..... Petitioner
                             Versus
Suresh Kumar Tomar, Executive Engineer, PWD, National
Highway Division, Dehradun          .....Respondent

Counsel for the Petitioner   :       Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate.

Counsel for the Respondent :         Mr. Jagdish Singh Bisht,
                                     Standing Counsel with Mr.
                                     Hargovind Pant, Brief Holder
                                     & Mr. Devesh Ghildiyal, Brief
                                     Holder.

Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.

This Contempt Petition has been filed alleging

wilful disobedience of an order dated 07.04.2025, passed in

Writ Petition No.2014 of 2023 (S/S). By the said order, the

following direction was issued:-

"10. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned

office memorandum dated 13.05.2021

(Annexure 2 to the writ petition) is quashed. The

respondent authorities are directed to refund the

amount of Rs.6,28,258/- that has been deducted

from the retiral dues of the petitioner, within two

weeks from today."

2026:UHC:737

2. Heard Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Jagdish Singh Bisht, learned Standing

Counsel for the respondent.

3. Compliance Affidavit has been filed by the

respondent.

4. According to the Compliance Affidavit, the bill of

Rs.6,28,258/- was sent to the treasury. The treasury

approved the bill on 26.08.2025, and, the payment of

Rs.6,28,258/- was made on 27.08.2025 through IFMS.

5. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, Advocate, submitted that the

petitioner has received the said amount. Therefore, he does

not want to pursue the matter further.

6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, this

Contempt Petition does not require any further

consideration, therefore, the proceedings in the present

Contempt Petition are closed.

___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.

Date: 10.02.2026 Pant/