Rapping the State of Punjab playing “hide and seek” with the court and in the dearness allowance (DA) matter, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Monday questioned the government’s claim that defects in its appeal before the Supreme Court had been cured.The Bench directed the High Court Registry to immediately obtain a status report from the Supreme Court regarding the appeal’s status before directing the Chief Secretary to remain personally present before it on Tuesday morning.“We are at our wits end to comprehend as to what is actually intended by the State of Punjab by playing hide and seek. If the appeal had already been filed on September 1, it could have got heard by now,” the Bench of Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor asserted.Pronouncing the orders in the open court, the Bench asserted to what extent a State could go in misrepresenting the facts before the court was apparent before it. The court observed that it had on the previous date of hearing summoned the Chief Secretary. He was present in the Court during the course of hearing and had filed an affidavit.After going through the affidavit, the Court added: “We may indicate that the State had filed its SLP on September 1 and we are today on October 5. For more than a month, the defect pointed out in the appeal has not been cured. We have passed orders thrice adjourning the matter in order to accommodate the State to pursue its remedy before the Supreme Court. This was done as the Court had observed on all previous occasions that it is the right of the State to challenge the judgement of this Court and an adequate opportunity for such purposes has to be given.”The Bench added it was with this intent that the Court had been adjourning the matter repeatedly with the observations that the State of Punjab might avail its remedy before the competent Court. This, however, had not been done so far. The Supreme Court website, with reference to diary number allotted to the State’s appeal, apparently suggested that the case was under defect.“The subsequent case filed by PSPCL also is lying under defect.… It appears that the attempt is only to buy time in the garb of pursuing legal remedy before the Supreme Court,” the Bench added.It also referred to senior advocate Sanjay Kaushal’s contention that “hundreds and thousands of crores are being disbursed by the State for other purposes, while rightful claims of retired persons, who have served the State of Punjab for decades together are being brazenly violated”The court was assisted in the matter on the applicants’ behalf by senior advocate Kaushal. Another application in the same matter was filed through counsels Gagneshwar Walia and Hargun Sethi, and was argued by senior advocate Chetan Mittal.The Bench added it had a large number of retired persons present before Court on almost all occasions when this matter was listed hoping that someday their rights would fructify. “This, however, has not happened despite the directions made by the court,” the Bench observed.The Court recorded in its order the Advocate-General’s stand that defects had been cured and the appeal pending before the Supreme Court was now in order. But the statement was emphatically denied by the other side.“In the event a false statement is made before the Court, the party making such disclosure would have to bear the consequences,” the Bench asserted, while fixing the matter for further hearing on Tuesday.“The Registry is directed to immediately obtain a status report from the Registry of the Supreme Court of India with regard to the status of the appeal filed by the State of Punjab, which are referred to in the affidavit filed today…,” the Bench added.The dispute relates to a common judgment passed on April 8 directing the Punjab Government to release Dearness Allowance (DA) and Dearness Relief (DR) to its employees and pensioners at the same rates as paid to members of the All India Services serving in Punjab, in accordance with the Central Government pattern.The judgment had directed compliance by June 30 and required the Chief Secretary to file an affidavit regarding compliance, following which appeals were filed in the matter. Subsequent judgment of August 3 was delivered by the Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor.The Bench dismissed the appeals filed by the State and PSPCL and affirmed the Single Judge’s directions, while modifying the timeline for implementation because the original June 30 deadline had already expired during the pendency of the appeals. The Bench directed release of the pending DA/DR instalments within a fortnight.