IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.O.C.P. No.281 of 2008 Date of Decision:- 26.05.2008 Punna Ram ....Petitioner(s) through Mr.Maharaj Kumar, Advocate vs. R.S.Yadav, Superintending Engineer, PWD B&R, Karnal ....Respondent(s) through Mr.R.S.Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. *** CORAM:-HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. *** 1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) In R.S.A.No.1074 of 2006 filed by the petitioner, this Court vide order dated 24.4.2006, stayed any recovery from the appellant, namely, the petitioner. Alleging disobedience of the above-stated order, this contempt petition has been filed in which learned State counsel was directed to have instructions. In deference thereto, Mr.R.S.Yadav, Superintending Engineer, PWD B&R Branch, Karnal has filed reply/affidavit in which it is not disputed that gratuity amounting to Rs.2,13,818/- and leave encashment amounting to Rs.1,31,580/- payable to the petitioner on his retirement, has been withheld which in a way amounts to an attempt to recover the disputed amount from the petitioner despite the stay against recovery passed by this C.O.C.P. No.281 of 2008 -2- Court. However, in order to give an opportunity to the respondents, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition at this stage with a clarificatory direction that the withheld amount be released forthwith subject to the petitioner's furnishing adequate security to the satisfaction of the competent Authority. Let the needful be done within one month. May 26, 2008 ( SURYA KANT ) poonam JUDGE