Less than a month after Punjab Chief Secretary KAP Sinha – among others – was put to notice for alleged criminal contempt in the dearness allowance (DA) case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday was told that the IAS officer had perpetuated the criminal contempt.Appearing before the Bench of Justice Vinod S Bhardwaj and Justice Ravinder Malik, senior advocate Sanjay Kaushal contended on behalf of the affected petitioner employees and pensioners that the Chief Secretary in his affidavit had stated that criminal contempt proceedings were not made out “as there was never ever any intent to wilfully mislead the Hon’ble Court”. It prompted the Court to examine whether intent or “mens rea” was an essential component of criminal contempt.Kaushal and senior advocate Chetan Mittal also referred to the affidavit, which said the State intended to pursue its available legal and constitutional remedies before the Supreme Court. “In case the State fails to get favourable order from the Supreme Court, it is always bound to fully comply the orders dated August 3 and pay the dearness allowance to the employees as well as to the pensioners along with interest at 6 per cent, as directed by this Court. “They have the audacity to come up before the Court as say so,” Kaushal asserted. The Bench was also told that the SLPs field in the matter were still lying in defect, while they got another one listed the very next day when the IAS officers are ordered to face an FIR in the CBI case.The Bench, during the course of hearing, verbally observed in the open court that the government’s conduct regarding the payment of DA to employees and pensioners did not inspire confidence following its failure to take steps to get the SLPs listed before the Supreme Court.“When you go through the sequence of events, there is hardly a valid reason for non-listing of the SLP. It seems a deliberate designed effort to ensure that the SLP is not listed at all, considering the fact that you have been successful in getting the other SLPs listed before Supreme Court at a short notice of 24 hours,” the Bench observed.The court also took note of the contention one of the defects that prevented the listing if the SLP was as “trivial” as the non-payment of Rs 520 court fees. “Rs 520 hai abhi Punjab Sarkar kay pass (Does the Punjab Government even have Rs 520 right now)?” the Bench orally observed.Referring to the issue of freebies and advertisements, the Bench asserted: “We have no objection if you have your advertisement on moon. We have no doubt in our mind that so far as the fiscal priorities are concerned, that is the domain of the Executive and the political leadership. You may put your hoarding on the Moon or the Mars, we are not concerned.”Appearing on Sinha’s behalf, senior advocate Vikas Singh contended that the issues had been dealt with by the Supreme Court. “If governments are not able to disclose to the people the good work they are doing, they can’t remain in power. If they can’t remain in power, they can’t do the good work. So it is not a small question,” he submitted.Responding to the court’s observations on non-payment of court fees, Vikas Singh contended: “That is a purely (AOR) advocate on record job. That has got nothing to do with the State finances. AOR has to pay that money. It is not as if there is any fiscal indiscipline. If your lordships say that, it gives an impression as if your lordships have taken judicial notice of the fact,” he said.The Bench, in turn, asserted: “There is something called fixing of an accountability” in a matter with high stakes. However, it clarified that no judicial notice has been taken so far in this regard. “But if need be, we might… this is something based on record”.Before parting with the order, the Bench directed the Chief Secretary to remain present on next date of hearing and warned further opportunity would not be extended if the affidavit was not filed. The Bench was assisted in the matter on the scope of criminal contempt by senior advocate RS Cheema as amicus curiae in the case.