This is an interim order in pending special leave petitions. It stays the criminal contempt proceedings and bars coercive steps in the civil contempt petition, but it records no finding on whether any contempt was committed, decides nothing on the merits of the dearness allowance arrears dispute, and does not fix the arrears amount — the State is to revert on what it will disburse by 31 March 2027.
- Case
- Additional Chief Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Finance v. Manjeet Singh Randhawa
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decision
- Bench
- B.V. Nagarathna; R. Mahadevan
- Case numbers
- SLP(C) No. 38661/2026; Diary No. 68262/2026
- Outcome
- Record of proceedings dated 5 November 2026 in SLP(C) No. 38661/2026 (with Diary Nos. 53830/2026 and 59443/2026): notice issued; further proceedings in the criminal contempt case stayed until further orders; no coercive steps in the civil contempt petition; matter listed on 1 December 2026.
Criminal contempt proceedings stayed until further orders
The Supreme Court has stayed further proceedings in the criminal contempt case initiated by the respondent against the Chief Secretary of Punjab and other officers of the State Government over the non-payment of dearness allowance (DA) arrears to government employees and pensioners.
A Bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan passed the order on 5 November 2026 in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 38661 of 2026, filed by the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government of Punjab, Department of Finance, against Manjeet Singh Randhawa. The Court said: “There shall be a stay of further proceedings in CM-6121-LPA-2026 in LPA No. 1437/2026, until further orders.”
In the two connected matters, Diary Nos. 53830 of 2026 and 59443 of 2026, the Court condoned the delay, issued notice to the respondents, and directed that no coercive steps be taken in the civil contempt petition, COCP No. 4013 of 2020, till the next date of hearing. It also directed that no coercive steps be initiated against the respondents in relation to the directions in paragraph 127 of the High Court’s impugned order. All three matters are listed on 1 December 2026.
The High Court orders behind the contempt
The contempt proceedings arise from the State Government’s alleged non-compliance with the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s directions on the payment of pending dearness allowance to employees and pensioners. The Supreme Court’s order records that it perused the High Court’s orders dated 12 October 2026 and 30 October 2026.
By the order dated 12 October 2026, made in CM No. 6121 of 2026 in LPA No. 1437 of 2026, the High Court had initiated criminal contempt proceedings against the Chief Secretary and other officers. By the subsequent order dated 30 October 2026, the High Court directed the Chief Secretary to be present in person before it on 5 November 2026 in that contempt case.
The order also records the background to the dearness allowance dispute as set out in paragraph 68 of the High Court’s impugned judgment. The Central Government had increased its dearness allowance from 42 per cent to 48 per cent with effect from 1 July 2023, from 46 per cent to 50 per cent with effect from 1 January 2024, and from 50 per cent to 53 per cent with effect from 1 July 2024. The State Government, by contrast, continued to pay dearness allowance at 38 per cent, which it enhanced to 42 per cent only on 1 November 2024.
What the Supreme Court was asked to decide
The State approached the Supreme Court against the High Court’s orders initiating and pursuing the criminal contempt proceedings, and against the main judgment on dearness allowance arrears. The Court heard Senior Advocate Vikas Singh for the petitioner-State and counsel for the respondent, and noted that it had been apprised of the background to the dispute leading to the filing of the criminal contempt petitions.
The immediate question before the Court was whether the criminal contempt proceedings, in which the Chief Secretary had been directed to appear in person on 5 November 2026, should be allowed to proceed while the State’s challenge to the underlying orders was pending. The Court answered that question by staying the contempt proceedings until further orders, without expressing any view on the merits of the dearness allowance dispute itself.
BANTHRY ANALYSISAn interim stay, not a decision on contempt
The 5 November order is an interim order. It does three things and nothing more: it stays the criminal contempt proceedings, it protects the State and its officers from coercive steps in the civil contempt petition and under paragraph 127 of the High Court’s order until the next hearing, and it fixes 1 December 2026 for the next hearing.
Nothing in the order decides whether the State committed contempt, whether the High Court’s directions on dearness allowance were complied with, or what arrears are payable. The order issues notice in the special leave petitions, which means the State’s challenge to the High Court’s orders will be heard on the merits at a later date. Until then, the contempt proceedings are paused, not decided.
What the State told the Court about the allowance rate
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the State, submitted that dearness allowance is presently being released at the rate of 53 per cent with effect from 29 October 2026. The State had increased the rate from 42 per cent to 50 per cent by a notification dated 23 September 2026, and from 50 per cent to 53 per cent by a notification dated 29 October 2026.
The notification dated 23 September 2026 has already been implemented in the current month, the Court recorded. The notification dated 29 October 2026 will be implemented with effect from December 2026, that is, with the November salary.
On the arrears, the position is different. For the release of arrears of dearness allowance for the period from 1 January 2016 to 30 June 2026, counsel submitted that he would revert after seeking instructions on what amount would be disbursed on or before 31 March 2027. The Court listed the matters on 1 December 2026 for that purpose.
What happens next
The criminal contempt proceedings in CM-6121-LPA-2026 in LPA No. 1437 of 2026 stand stayed until further orders, and no coercive steps are to be taken in the civil contempt petition, COCP No. 4013 of 2020, till the next date of hearing.
When the matters come up on 1 December 2026, the State is expected to state what amount of the dearness allowance arrears for 1 January 2016 to 30 June 2026 it will disburse on or before 31 March 2027. The special leave petitions against the High Court’s orders remain pending, and no finding on contempt or on the arrears has been recorded.
BANTHRY ANALYSISFor law students
This order is a good example of how the Supreme Court uses interim protection in contempt matters. A stay of contempt proceedings does not mean the Court has found that no contempt was committed; it means the proceedings are paused while the challenge to the underlying orders is heard. Students should notice what the order does not do: it does not quash the contempt proceedings, it does not decide the dearness allowance dispute, and it does not fix any arrears figure.
The order also shows the difference between the rate of an allowance and the arrears of that allowance. The State could tell the Court that the current rate is now 53 per cent, matching the Central pattern, while the arrears for the period from 1 January 2016 to 30 June 2026 remain an open question, to be answered with a concrete figure by 31 March 2027. When reading any interim order, always ask which questions it answers and which it expressly leaves for the next date.
READING PROMPTSQuestions for a closer reading
- What exactly did the Supreme Court stay on 5 November 2026, and what protection did it extend to the parallel civil contempt petition?
- What had the Punjab and Haryana High Court directed on 12 and 30 October 2026, and why was the Chief Secretary required to appear in person on 5 November 2026?
- What has the State told the Court about the current rate of dearness allowance, and what remains to be decided when the matter is listed on 1 December 2026?
