Punjab DA Case: HC Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost on Chief Secretary, Demands Immediate Compliance Plan
Punjab DA Case: The Punjab and Haryana High Court imposed a ₹1 lakh cost on Punjab Chief Secretary KAP Sinha for defying orders on clearing DA arrears for 8 lakh employees and pensioners.
North Desk Correspondent
Chandigarh, October 27
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has imposed a penalty of ₹1 lakh on Punjab Chief Secretary K.A.P. Sinha for the state administration’s continuous non-compliance and failure to file a formal response regarding pending Dearness Allowance (DA) and Dearness Relief (DR) arrears. In the court’s words, this is “for failure to file the status/compliance report despite grant of sufficient time.”
Taking a stern view of the government’s delaying tactics, the single-judge bench of Justice Harsh Bunger ordered the Chief Secretary to appear before the court in person on November 3, 2026, with an affidavit detailing the specific timeline for releasing the outstanding funds.
The contempt proceedings directly affect an estimated 8 lakh government employees and pensioners across the state who have been waiting for unpaid DA dues.
Punjab DA Case:
The Contempt Hearing: Court Slams ‘Delay Tactics’
Punjab DA Case: The contempt petition was initiated by Nirmal Singh (retired Chief Engineer, PSPCL) alongside employee unions, alleging deliberate defiance of the High Court’s directions issued earlier this year.
During the hearing, counsel representing the employees highlighted that the Bhagwant Mann-led government has persistently dragged its feet instead of liquidating the dues. Furthermore, it was brought to the court’s notice that while the state government claimed to have moved the Supreme Court, its Special Leave Petition (SLP) sat on the apex court registry’s defect list for weeks without getting cured.
Irked by the state’s persistent non-filing of a reply, Justice Bunger:
Imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh on the Punjab Chief Secretary. This goes into the High Court Lawyers Welfare Fund.
File a personal affidavit within three days, that is by October 30, regarding the “compliance of the directions” issued by the division bench on August 3, 2026.
Summoned the Chief Secretary to remain personally present in court for the next hearing on November 3, 2026.
Ordered an explicit compliance roadmap, mandating an explanation of actionable steps taken so far to disburse the payments. The court ordered CS to explain “the stand of the state of Punjab in issuing directions… contained in the memorandum” dated August 17, 2026.
This memorandum states that “no such orders may be implemented without prior concurrence of the FD or unless generalised instructions are issued, whichever is earlier.” The counsel for the petitioners had referred to this memorandum during the hearing.
Legal Journey: How the DA Battle Reached This Stage
The dispute in Punjab DA Case over pending DA has evolved through a sequence of decisive judicial orders:
1. The Single Bench Verdict (April 2026)
In CWP-7291-2026 (Nirmal Singh Dhanoa and others v. State of Punjab), the High Court ruled that Dearness Allowance is not a discretionary bonus or bounty, but an integral component of an employee’s livelihood intended to offset inflation. The state was ordered to clear pending DA increments in parity with central patterns.
2. The Division Bench Blow (August 2026)
Challenging the single-judge order, the state Finance Department filed Letters Patent Appeals led by LPA-1437-2026.
On August 3, 2026, a Division Bench comprising Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor delivered a crushing setback to the state government:
Rejected the “Financial Crunch” Defence: The court dismissed the state’s argument that it was not “lawfully possible” to clear the ₹14,191 crore liability in one go.
15-Day Payment Window: The bench ordered the liquidation of pending arrears within 15 days.
Blanket Ban on Advertisements: In an unprecedented step, the High Court restrained the Punjab government from releasing large-scale publicity campaigns and promotional advertisements until the statutory dues of employees were cleared.
3. The SLP Defect Controversy (October 2026)
When the government failed to comply by August 31, the employees filed contempt petitions. When questioned by the High Court regarding non-compliance, state representatives claimed that an SLP had been filed and re-filed in the Supreme Court.
However, scrutiny of Supreme Court registry reports revealed that the petition remained unlisted because of fundamental defects that were not cured, prompting the High Court to issue a show-cause notice for criminal contempt for attempting to mislead the bench.
ALSO: Punjab Chief Secretary Faces Contempt In DA Case; Deliberate Misstatement, Says High Court
Punjab High Court Rejects its ‘No Money’ Plea, Orders Full DA Payment by June 30
Follow North Desk on WhatsApp for the latest from Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vb7ccdxJENy2H87DBG3E
