A single-paragraph order wherein the court disposed of a contempt petition by discharging respondents after accepting their submission regarding the petitioner's continuation and presence based on Delhi School Education Rules, 1973.
Respondents discharged from contempt petition and the matter disposed of.
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.
$~1
DEBASISH KARMAKAR ..... Petitioner Through Mrs.Tamali Wad, Adv. for Mrs.Indrani Ghosh, Adv.
versus NEM SINGH & ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.Dinesh Kr. Bharti, Adv. for R-1 with R-1 in person. Mr.Manish Kumar, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person. Mr.Neeraj Grover, Adv. with Mr.Yatin Chadha, Adv. for R-3 with R-3 in person.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT O R D E R % 18.01.2019
Pursuant to order dated 05.12.2018, the respondents are personally present in Court with their counsels.
Counsel for the respondents, on instructions, submit that in view of proviso to sub-rule (2) of Rule 110 of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, the petitioner shall continue up to 30.04.2019 and he shall not face any difficulty in marking his presence or otherwise.
In view of the above, I hereby discharge the respondents from the contempt petition.
The petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J
JANUARY 18, 2019/ab
DEBASISH KARMAKAR
NEM SINGH & ORS
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
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
