The Court dismissed contempt petitions filed for non-compliance with an earlier order. It held that the impugned order did not mandate a specific relief, only an expeditious decision, making contempt inapposite. The petitions were dismissed as withdrawn.
Contempt petitions dismissed as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Signature Not Verified
Signing Date:18.01.2025 17:29:15 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file an d no page is missing.
CONT.CAS(C) 259/2018 CONT.CASfQ 260/2018
The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners alleging noncompliance of order dated September 04, 2017. The said order reads as
under
"Mr.Sanjoy Ghose, learned counsel appearing for the GNCTD states, he has taken written instructions as per which, a fresh proposal along with the views expressed by the Finance Department is going to be placed before the Cabinet for taking a final decision. He states, it is very difficult for him to prescribe a time period in that regard.
Noting the above, the petition is disposed of by holding that the same is premature. It is expected that the Cabinet shall take the decision as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six monthsfrom today. If the petitioners are still aggrieved by any decision to be taken by the Cabinet, they shall seek such remedy as available to them in accordance with the law. The respondents shall be at liberty to take such objections as available to them on facts as well as in law. It is made clear that the Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case. "
Suffice to state, a perusal of the order would reveal, the Court had
only expressed its desire that a decision be taken as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from that date and nothing more. Even though, no action has been taken pursuant to the said order, noting the
tenor of the order a contempt petition would not be the remedy for the petitioners. Appropriate shall be for the petitioners to file a fresh writ petition for appropriate relief. In view of this order, Mr. Bhatia seeks to
withdraw the contempt petitions. The same are dismissed as withdrawn.
V.KAMESWARRAO, J
APRIL 11, 2018/aA:
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a contempt petition is the appropriate remedy when a prior order held the matter premature.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to withdraw the contempt petitions in the circumstances.
Mr. Bhatia
GNCTD
V. Kameswara Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
