The Punjab and Haryana high court on Tuesday directed Punjab chief secretary KAP Sinha to explain why criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him for making a “prima facie false statement” in the ongoing dearness allowance (DA) case.
A bench, comprising chief justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and justice Rohit Kapoor, passed the order in Sinha’s presence. In that ruling, the court ordered the state to release all pending DA installments to employees and pensioners on a par with central government rates paid to All India Services (IAS/IPS/IFS) officers within a fortnight. The directive came during a hearing on two applications filed by Punjab government employees and pensioners, who alleged non-compliance with the court’s August 3 judgment.
The court also barred the state from indulging in “unproductive expenditures”, such as large-scale print or social media ad campaigns, until all dues were settled, directing the chief secretary to file a compliance affidavit by August 31.
The action followed revelations that the Punjab government’s appeal remains lodged with defects before the Supreme Court, directly contradicting Sinha’s Monday statement that a fresh appeal had been filed after curing all defects.
This prompted the petitioner counsels to demand contempt action against Sinha. Hence, the court could have entertained their applications, they submitted. The government failed to meet the deadline and filed an appeal in the Supreme Court on September 1. Seeking clarity amid conflicting claims from petitioners and the state, the high court requested a status report from the Supreme Court registry on October 5. The contempt proceedings are already pending before the single-judge bench since August 21. Appearing for petitioners, senior advocates Sanjay Kaushal and Chetan Mittal had vehemently argued that the chief secretary was to file a compliance report regarding the August 3 order and that has not been done.
Because the state has not rectified defects flagged by the top court’s registry, a month later, the apex court is yet to hear the matter.
The Supreme Court registry report said that the September 1 appeal of the government had 11 defects, September 26 appeal of PSPCL seven defects and re-filed appeal also contained “numerous defects”. The Punjab government roped in Supreme Court senior advocate Vikas Singh on Tuesday, who accused the petitioners of “bench-hunting” and added that this court could not have heard the matter as jurisdiction lay before a contempt court (a single-judge bench).
He also cited tedious documentation processes in filing the state’s appeals before the Supreme Court as the reason behind the delay in hearing the appeal and sought an adjournment. The applicants were also parties in the earlier round of litigation.
