Comply or be present, Punjab and Haryana High Court tells Chandigarh Adviser

Tribune News Service

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, March 7

A year after the action of retiring at 60 assistant professors serving in the Government College of Art and the Government College of Architecture in Chandigarh was set aside, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today made it clear that UT Adviser Dharam Pal and the other respondent authorities would remain present in the court in case of non-compliance with “either of the directions in the judgment, dated March 1, 2021”.

The direction by Justice BS Walia of the High Court came during the hearing of a petition filed by Jogender Pal Singh and another petitioner against Dharam Pal and other respondents alleging contempt of court. A Division Bench of the High Court, comprising Justice Augustine George Masih and Justice Ashok Kumar Verma, has already imposed Rs20,000 costs on the UT Administration and other applicants after they sought extension in time for implementing the High Court judgment.

As the matter came up for resumed hearing, UT senior standing counsel Anil Mehta produced an order, dated March 2, allowing the petitioners to rejoin duty with immediate effect in compliance with the orders, dated March 1, 2021. The counsel for the petitioners, on the other hand, contended that the order, dated March 2, was not in compliance with the orders, dated March 1 last year. As per the orders, the respondents were required to take back the petitioners on the quashing of their action of retiring them at 60. A direction had also been issued to the respondents to release all consequential benefits accruing to the petitioners. A two-month deadline was also set for the purpose.

Reiterating that rejoining of the petitioners was not in terms of orders dated March 1, 2021, senior advocate Rajiv Atma Ram and counsel Arjun Partap Atma Ram contended that they were not allowed to rejoin with effect from the date they were relieved, but only from March 2. Besides, financial benefits in terms of the decision had also not been released.

“It is made clear that in case of non-compliance with either of the directions in the judgment, dated March 1, 2021, in CWP 20447 of 2020, the respondents shall remain present in the court,” Justice Walia asserted, while fixing the case for March 15.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.