Punjab DA Arrears Case: High Court Seeks Government Reply on KAP Sinha Contempt Proceedings, Appoints RS Cheema as Amicus Curiae

October 12, 2026

Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday sought a response from the Punjab government in the ongoing case concerning unpaid Dearness Allowance (DA) arrears for government employees and pensioners. The proceedings are linked to criminal contempt action against Punjab Chief Secretary KAP Sinha over an alleged incorrect statement regarding the status of the state government’s appeal before the Supreme Court.

During the hearing, the court also appointed Senior Advocate RS Cheema as amicus curiae to assist it on the legal and technical aspects of the matter. The government has been directed to file its response by October 30, when the case is scheduled to be heard again.

Chief Secretary KAP Sinha appeared through video conferencing before Justice Vinod Bhardwaj. During the hearing, the judge questioned him about the status of the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Punjab government before the Supreme Court.

Sinha said he would consult the advocate concerned before submitting an affidavit detailing the status of the petition. He also sought time to respond to the criminal contempt proceedings against him.

Advocate Chetan Mittal, appearing for the employees, submitted that approximately eight lakh government employees and pensioners were awaiting payment of their outstanding DA dues.

The latest hearing follows earlier proceedings in which the High Court questioned the state government’s claim that defects in its Supreme Court appeal had been rectified. The court had subsequently issued a show-cause notice to Sinha, asking him to explain why criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him.

Why the High Court Issued a Contempt Notice to Chief Secretary KAP Sinha

The controversy centres on the Punjab government’s failure to implement the High Court’s August 3 order directing the release of pending DA and Dearness Relief (DR) instalments to eligible employees and pensioners within 15 days.

After the state government challenged the order before the Supreme Court, the High Court continued to examine whether its directions had been complied with and whether the appeal had been properly filed.

During the proceedings, the Chief Secretary and the state’s legal representatives informed the High Court that defects in the Supreme Court appeal had been rectified and that the matter had been re-filed.

However, a status report from the Supreme Court registry subsequently indicated that defects remained in the appeal. The High Court viewed the discrepancy between the information supplied to it and the registry’s report seriously and issued a show-cause notice to Sinha over an alleged misleading statement.

The contempt proceedings concern the court’s assessment of the information provided about the appeal and compliance with its earlier directions. The allegations remain subject to the ongoing judicial process.

Employees’ Lawyers Question Delay in Supreme Court Appeal

During earlier hearings, Senior Advocate Sanjay Kaushal, representing the employees, questioned why the Punjab government’s appeal against the DA order had not been listed for hearing in the Supreme Court.

Kaushal argued that the state had moved the Supreme Court promptly in another matter involving an Enforcement Directorate-related High Court order, whereas the appeal concerning the DA dues of lakhs of employees and pensioners remained stalled because of procedural defects.

He described the difference in the handling of the matters as a double standard and questioned the delay in resolving the employees’ claims.

Representing the Punjab government, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh argued that the outstanding DA dues related to previous administrations and had not accrued entirely during the tenure of the present government.

The High Court had previously observed that the government was entitled to challenge its judgment before the Supreme Court. However, it stressed that filing an appeal did not justify providing incorrect information to the court or failing to comply with judicial directions.

The court also questioned why defects in the Supreme Court appeal had not been removed within the time allowed.

Punjab DA Arrears Case: Key Developments and Timeline

April 8, 2026: Detailed hearings began in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on petitions filed by government employees challenging the state government’s policy concerning DA increases based on the Central government pattern.

August 3, 2026: A division bench comprising Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor directed the Punjab government to release outstanding DA and DR instalments to employees and pensioners at the rates applicable to members of the All India Services serving in Punjab. The court set a 15-day deadline for compliance. It also directed that large-scale publicity advertisements in print and on social media should not be released until the outstanding dues were cleared.

August 31, 2026: The deadline for filing the Chief Secretary’s compliance affidavit expired, but the employees’ outstanding dues had not been cleared, leading to further proceedings.

September 1, 2026: The Punjab government approached the Supreme Court by filing a Special Leave Petition challenging the High Court’s August 3 judgment.

September 10, 2026: The High Court sought a fresh response from the government regarding non-compliance. After being informed that the state had approached the Supreme Court, the court granted additional time to rectify defects in the appeal.

October 1, 2026: According to the information presented by the Advocate General and the Chief Secretary, the appeal had been re-filed before the Supreme Court registry after rectification of defects.

October 6, 2026: After receiving information from the Supreme Court registry indicating that defects remained in the appeal, the High Court issued a show-cause notice to Chief Secretary KAP Sinha. It directed him to explain why criminal contempt proceedings should not be initiated against him and required his appearance at the next hearing.

October 9, 2026: Sinha appeared before the High Court, and his counsel offered an unconditional apology. The Chief Justice-led bench declined to conclude the matter on that basis and directed that the contempt proceedings be placed before the appropriate bench under the court’s roster.

October 12, 2026: The High Court sought the Punjab government’s response, heard submissions concerning the status of the Supreme Court appeal and appointed Senior Advocate RS Cheema as amicus curiae. The government was directed to file its response by October 30, the next scheduled hearing.

What Happens Next?

The Punjab government is now required to respond to the issues raised in the contempt proceedings by October 30. The court will consider the government’s explanation and the status of the Supreme Court appeal as the case progresses.

The appointment of an amicus curiae is intended to assist the court with the legal and technical questions arising in the proceedings. Meanwhile, the outstanding DA and DR payments remain the central issue for the employees and pensioners seeking implementation of the August 3 judgment.

The contempt proceedings against the Chief Secretary are ongoing, and no final determination of his liability has been made in the matter.