'We Don't Appreciate Such Arm-Twisting': Supreme Court Stays Criminal Contempt Proceedings Against Punjab Chief Secretary In DA Case
| "You can't haul up Chief Secretary like this. Who is going to pay you?" J BV Nagarathna remarked.
The Supreme Court today stayed criminal contempt proceedings initiated against the Punjab Chief Secretary and other government officials over alleged non-compliance of the Punjab and Haryana High Court orders in the Dearness Allowance case.
A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan directed stay of further proceedings in the criminal contempt case, after hearing Senior Advocates Vikas Singh, Shadan Farasat, PS Patwalia for the State and its officials and Senior Advocate Devadatt Kamat for the respondents.
In a connected case pertaining to civil contempt, it said that no coercive steps be taken.
During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna remarked that the bench did not appreciate such "arm-twisting". It asked the respondents whether they wanted compliance of the order or that the Chief Secretary suffer jail.
After the bench was informed that the State has already increased the DA from 43% to 53%, the State was asked to inform as to how much arrears it will pay by 31 March 2027.
The case arises from the State Government's alleged non-compliance with the High Court's directions concerning payment of pending DA to government employees. In August, the High Court had dismissed a batch of Letters Patent Appeals filed by the Punjab Government and Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL), affirming that once the State adopted the Central Government pattern for grant of Dearness Allowance and Dearness Relief, it incurred a binding obligation to release the accrued instalments and could not defer them indefinitely under the guise of financial constraint.
It directed that the State and PSPCL must release all pending instalments of DA/DR to their employees and pensioners at the rates paid to All India Services officers serving in Punjab, in line with the Central Government pattern, within a fortnight, that is, by August 18, 2026.
Any unpaid amount was to carry simple interest at 6% per annum from the expiry of that period and the Chief Secretary was to file a compliance affidavit by August 31, 2026. Until the dues were cleared, the State must not spend on “unproductive expenditures, such as large-scale advertising campaigns in print or social media”, the Court stated.
On October 9, the High Court noted that a compliance affidavit in terms of the August order had not been filed, following which applications seeking contempt action were moved. The State informed that an SLP had been preferred before the Supreme Court on September 1, and as such, the matter was repeatedly adjourned to give the State a chance to be heard in appeal.
The applicants seeking contempt action claimed before the High Court that the Chief Secretary had filed an affidavit stating that defects in the SLP before Supreme Court had been cured. However, as per a report from the Supreme Court registry, the SLP of the State remained under defect at the time. On October 9, the Division Bench directed placing of the matter before the roster bench.
On October 12, the High Court issued formal criminal contempt notice upon the Chief Secretary and others.
The Supreme Court is now seized of 3 cases arising out of the High Court proceedings - 2 pertaining to the main judgment (one SLP by State and one by PSPCL) and 1 pertaining to the criminal contempt.
Appearance: Sr Adv Vikas Singh, AAGs Vivek Jain, Mohd Irshad and Rajat Bharadwaj, AoR Karan Sharma (for State); Sr Advs PS Patwalia and Shadan Farasat (for PSPCL)
Case : ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY Versus MANJEET SINGH RANDHAWA, SLP(C) No. 38661/2026 (and connected cases)