IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

204 COCP No.553 of 2019 (O & M)

Date of decision :-24.02.2026 Citizens for Public Causes (Regd.)

…..Petitioner Versus Sh. Parminder Singh Gill, Chief Administrator, GLADA and others …..Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: Mr. G.S. Virk, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rupinder Singh Khosla, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Yogender Verma, Advocate for respondents No.1, 3 and 4.

Mr. Somesh Gupta, Advocate Sr. Panel Counsel (through VC) for UOI.

NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral)

Present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of order dated 16.12.2008 (Annexure P-1) passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP-17495-2007 titled as “Citizens for Public Causes (Regd.) vs. The State of Punjab and others”, whereby the writ petition was disposed of with the following observations :-

“….Mr.Sareen learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the light of the decision now taken by the State Govenrment, nothing further survives for consideration in this petition except that a direction ought to be issued to the government to expedite the process of construction of the road and to complete the same within a specific time frame.

Mr.Amol Rattan Singh, counsel appearing for respondents No.1 and 4. however, submits that the process of acquisition of the land required for the second link between F and G in the site plan has not yet started as the authority is still in the process of preparing a site plan for the same, no time frame can be truly realistic at this stage.

Learned counsel appearing for some of interveners, who happen to be owners of the land between missing link No.1 marked D to E in the site plan submitted that their houses have yet to be demolished in case the said link was to be constructed. It is not, however, disputed that challenge to the acquisition proceedings in relation to the said land has already been repelled by the Courts and all that remains to be done is to carry out the construction work in that area.

In the circumstances, therefore, nothing really survives for our consideration in these proceedings. The writ petition is accordingly disposed off with the observations that the authorities concerned would be well advised to expedite the process of construction of the road so that substantial expenditure already incurred on construction of the two stretches that have already been constructed does not go infructuous. All pending applications shall also stand disposed off in light of the above order. No costs.”

At the outset, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents No.1, 3 and 4, on instructions, submits that in substantial compliance of the aforesaid Writ Court order dated 16.12.2008, the construction work stands completed except for the missing second link from Point ‘F’ to ‘G’. It is further undertaken that the remaining construction shall be completed by October, 2026.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the undertaking given on behalf of respondents No.1, 3 and 4, the present contempt petition may be disposed of.

Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, and the undertaking given by learned Senior Counsel for respondents No.1, 3 and 4, time is granted to complete the construction of the remaining link positively on or before December, 2026.

In view of the above undertaking and the statements made by learned counsel for the parties, the present contempt petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction.

However, it is made clear that in the event the needful, as undertaken, is not completed within the stipulated period, the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek revival of the present contempt petition in accordance with law.

Rule stands discharged.

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

February 24, 2026 ( NIDHI GUPTA )

Vijay Asija JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No