HC issues Contempt Notice to Punjab Chief Secretary Over Unauthorized Transfer of Senior IAS Officer
Chandigarh, March 2, 2025:
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has served a contempt notice to both the former and current chief secretaries of Punjab over the transfer of Punjab cadre IAS officer Amit Kumar to Chandigarh. This transfer was carried out despite the court’s explicit instruction that no such move should be made without its prior approval. Additionally, the bench directed that the entire case paper-book be submitted to the office of the Additional Solicitor General of India, as the Centre has been named a party in the proceedings.
This case is currently pending before the High Court following a petition filed by Kuldeep Singh, which alleges the misappropriation of Shamlat land in the villages around Chandigarh.
Amit Kumar, an IAS officer from the 2008 batch, was appointed as the commissioner-cum-appellate authority on the High Court’s orders to investigate the misappropriation of village panchayat lands in Punjab, particularly in the Mohali village near Chandigarh. However, he was subsequently transferred on central deputation and is now serving as the commissioner of the Municipal Corporation Chandigarh.
During Thursday’s hearing before a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel, the counsel for the State of Punjab acknowledged that Amit Kumar’s deputation transfer from Punjab to Chandigarh on October 14, 2024, was executed without obtaining the required prior approval from either the amicus curiae or the court. This was done in violation of an interim order dated May 10, 2018. The counsel further admitted that due to this transfer, the officer had been unable to fulfill his duties as commissioner-cum-appellate authority for the past four to five months.
The bench observed, "Issue notice to both the former and the current chief secretaries of Punjab, asking them to explain why contempt proceedings for violating the interim order dated May 10, 2018, should not be initiated against them. A reply should be filed before the next hearing date." The matter has been adjourned to March 11 for further hearing.