No Willful Disobedience of the Order — Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition on Compassionate Appointment Case

Share:
disobedience land bail framing identity jail v property Land suits Mandatory Performance Criminal Live-in Relationships protection bail legal Land Live Acquisition landlord Crime appointment Gram Panchayat acquittal motor Father's Murder land civil actual account bail jurisdiction award land bail Deed constable licensing cbi sexual FIR bail cheque property property property Evidence e liberty

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana delivered a verdict on September 11, dismissing a contempt petition filed by Sarabjit Kaur, the widow of the original writ petitioner Amandeep Singh. The Court observed that there was “no willful disobedience of the order dated 14.08.2019” and granted the petitioner liberty to avail alternative remedies under the law.

Amandeep Singh initially filed the writ petition seeking compassionate benefits following the death of his father, Bhupinder Singh, a government servant. The Court had earlier set aside an order that denied him these benefits, directing the respondents to “reconsider the application of the petitioner in accordance with prevalent applicable Policy.”

After Amandeep Singh’s passing, his widow, Sarabjit Kaur, took up the case. An application for clarification on the original order was also disposed of, indicating that the case should be considered “as per the policy, prevalent as on the date of death of the father of the petitioner.”

The main point of contention was whether Sarabjit Kaur, being the daughter-in-law of the deceased government servant, is eligible for the compassionate benefits under the existing policy. While counsel for the respondent argued that she was not a dependent person under the policy, the petitioner’s counsel referred to a new State Government scheme that could potentially include her.

 In its final observation, the Court stated, “It is a disputed fact whether the petitioner, being the daughter-in-law of the deceased employee, is covered in the policy or not, which cannot be decided in the present contempt petition.” Therefore, the contempt petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioner the liberty to explore alternative legal remedies.

The judgement underlines the complexities involved in compassionate appointments and leaves room for future legal deliberations on the subject.

Date of decision: 11.09.2023

Sarbjeet Kaur  vs Baldev Singh Saran and Others       

Download Judgment

Share: