COCP No. 1221 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No. 1221 of 2011 Date of Decision: 14.10.2011 Sh. Bhagat Singh ....Petitioner. Versus Sh. Ashwani Kumar and another ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: None for the petitioner. Mr. Arun Walia, Advocate for the respondents. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This Court vide order dated 25.7.2008 while adjudicating CWP No. 18558 of 2002 had observed as under:- “Consequently and for the reasons afore-stated, these writ petitions are allowed, the demand notices as well as the impugned speaking order are hereby quashed, however, with liberty to the respondents to serve fresh demand notices upon the petitioners after redetermining their liability on the basis of the amount of compensation to be awarded to the land-owners by the learned District Judge/Additional District Judge, Panchkula.” 2. A perusal of the aforesaid order shows that the writ petitions were allowed and the demand notices as well as the impugned COCP No. 1221 of 2011 -2- speaking orders were quashed by giving liberty to the respondents to serve fresh demand notices after determining the liability on the basis of the amount of compensation that might be awarded to the landowners by the District Judge/Additional District Judge, Panchkula. It was further stated that no refund shall be admissible to the allottees as the liability to pay additional amount was yet to be finally determined. 3. Thereafter, the respondents issued Annexure P-2 dated 12.1.2011 demanding a sum of Rs.2,80,000/- balance outstanding amount and Annexure P-4 dated 28.2.2011 demanding further amount of Rs.2,82,500/- on the same account. 4. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant petition under the Contempt of Courts Act stating that the directions contained in order dated 25.7.2008 have been violated. 5. Reply by way of affidavit of Ashwani Sharma, Estate Officer, HUDA, Panchkula has been filed wherein it has been stated that letters dated 12.1.2011 and 28.2.2011 erroneously issued by the Estate Office have been withdrawn vide office memo No. 11526 dated 1.8.2011 (Annexure R-1) and memo No. 12116 dated 16.8.2011 (Annexure R-2). The deponent has tendered unconditional apology for issuance of letters Annexures P-2 and P-4. 6. In view of the above, no further action is called for in this contempt petition and the same is disposed of as such. October 14, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE