IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

CACP No. 29 of 2024 (O&M)

in COCP No. 3454 of 2024 in CWP No. 8225 of 2023 Reserved on: 27.11.2024 Pronounced on: 07.1.2025 Amit Kumar Aggarwal and others .....Appellants Versus Maya Devi ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Argued by: Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl. A.G., Haryana Mr. Pardeep Prakash Chahar, Sr. DAG, Haryana, Mr. Saurabh Mago, DAG, Haryana Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate and Mr. Siddhant Arora, Advocate for the appellants.

Mr. Vivek Aggarwal, Advocate for the respondent.

****

SURESHWAR THAKUR , J.

1. The instant appeal has been directed against the order dated 20.9.2024, as passed by the learned Contempt Bench of this Court in COCP No. 3454 of 2024.

Brief facts of the case.

2. The respondent herein vide letter dated 16.6.1980, was appointed as a Mahila Craft Teacher in the Panchayat Samiti, Assandh, District Karnal and her services were regularized vide order dated 17.8.1995, and, on 31.10.2017, she retired from the post of Craft Teacher from Panchayat Samiti Indri, District Karnal. The respondent herein instituted CWP No. 8225 of 2023 before this Court with a prayer therein to direct the appellants to release her pension, gratuity, medical allowances and other retiral benefits along with interest from the due date. Vide order dated 28.5.2024, the said petition was disposed by this Court but in terms of the order dated 7.3.2024 passed in CWP-8306- 2015. The operative part of the said order becomes extracted hereinafter.

“Keeping in view the above, the claim of the petitioner(s) for the grant of pension is covered by the decision in Sunder Devi (supra), Hanuman (supra) as well as Daya Rani (supra). The present petitions are disposed of in terms of Daya Rani’s case (supra). The impugned orders rejecting the claim are set-aside. The petitioner(s) are held entitled to the claimed benefits keeping in view the decision in Daya Rani’s case (supra).

Let the said order be complied with within a periuod of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.”

3. Since the order dated 28.5.2024 remained purportedly uncomplied, thereby the respondent herein preferred COCP No. 3454 of 2024, before this Court, with a prayer therein to intiate contempt proceedings against the contemnors concerned, thus on account of the appellants herein purportedly wilfully disobeying the order (supra) passed by this Court. It has been further alleged therein, that even after the passing of the order dated 28.5.2024, the respondents concerned have not complied with the directions of this Court, which amounts to wilful disobedience on their part.

4. The learned Contempt Court concerned, vide order dated

20.9.2024, passed the hereinafter order upon the COCP (supra).

“Considering the fact that directions to consider the claim of the petitioner was passed on 28.05.2024, a period of more than 4½ months has elapsed, thus, in case the compliance report is not filed within the aforesaid stipulated period, the officer concerned shall join the proceedings through videoconferencing and would be liable to pay litigation costs to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.50,000/- from his/her own pocket. ”

5. The order (supra), passed by the learned Single Judge (Contempt Court) has caused pain to the appellants herein and has led them to file thereagainst the instant appeal before this Court.

6. In pursuance to the said order, the appellants filed a status report, thus detailing thereins that against the order dated 28.5.2024, LPA No. 2478 of 2024 has been filed which is pending adjudication.

Submissions of the learned counsels for the appellants

7. The learned counsels for the appellants have argued before this Court that the Hon’ble Contempt Bench rather has exceeded its jurisdiction by imposing costs of Rs. 50,000/- that too, on the first date of hearing of the contempt petition. They further submit that the order imposing costs of Rs. 50,000/- is incidental to and/or