IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 115 COCP-3467-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.07.2026 Sandeep ...Petitioner Versus Chinmai Garg ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. A.K. Premi, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for alleged wilful disobedience of judgment dated 29.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-22811-2018 and a bunch of connected cases, which includes CWP-4643-2019 filed by the petitioner herein. The operative part of the common judgment reads thus: “This Court in afore cited judgments has already decided the issue in favour of many candidates. Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld orders of this Court. Each petitioner is having separate kind of computer course certificate. The case of every petitioner needs to be examined in light of afore-cited judgments. Accordingly, the respondent is hereby directed to consider case of each petitioner in the light of afore-cited judgments. The respondent would pass speaking order in the case of each petitioner after granting him opportunity of hearing. If any petitioner SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.28 14:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-3467-2026 (O&M) -2-

is selected, he would be entitled to consequential benefits as granted by Hon’ble Supreme Court in afore-cited order dated 20.08.2020. Needful shall be done within a period of six months from today.” 2. On an advance copy having been furnished, Mr. Praveen Kumar, DAG, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent and submits that there were 150 candidates, who were to be given an opportunity of personal hearing, which consumed considerable time. The said exercise has since been completed and a speaking order would be passed within a week from today. 3. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition at this stage, while reserving his right to seek revival, if required. 4. Disposed of with the aforesaid observations. (VIKAS SURI) July 27, 2026 JUDGE sumit.k Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether Reportable : Yes / No SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.28 14:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 115 COCP-3467-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.07.2026 Sandeep ...Petitioner Versus Chinmai Garg ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. A.K. Premi, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** VIKAS SURI, J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for alleged wilful disobedience of judgment dated 29.05.2025 (Annexure P-1), passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in CWP-22811-2018 and a bunch of connected cases, which includes CWP-4643-2019 filed by the petitioner herein. The operative part of the common judgment reads thus: “This Court in afore cited judgments has already decided the issue in favour of many candidates. Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld orders of this Court. Each petitioner is having separate kind of computer course certificate. The case of every petitioner needs to be examined in light of afore-cited judgments. Accordingly, the respondent is hereby directed to consider case of each petitioner in the light of afore-cited judgments. The respondent would pass speaking order in the case of each petitioner after granting him opportunity of hearing. If any petitioner SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.28 14:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP-3467-2026 (O&M) -2-

is selected, he would be entitled to consequential benefits as granted by Hon’ble Supreme Court in afore-cited order dated 20.08.2020. Needful shall be done within a period of six months from today.” 2. On an advance copy having been furnished, Mr. Praveen Kumar, DAG, Haryana, puts in appearance on behalf of the respondent and submits that there were 150 candidates, who were to be given an opportunity of personal hearing, which consumed considerable time. The said exercise has since been completed and a speaking order would be passed within a week from today. 3. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the present petition at this stage, while reserving his right to seek revival, if required. 4. Disposed of with the aforesaid observations. (VIKAS SURI) July 27, 2026 JUDGE sumit.k Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether Reportable : Yes / No SUMIT KUMAR 2026.07.28 14:59 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment