Disposed

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Jai Pal Singh

Delhi HC4 Jul 2024W.P.(C)/1330/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Workman sought release of ₹12,17,043/- deposited by MCD under an earlier order after dismissal of the writ petition. The Registrar rejected MCD's objection, recorded the respondent's statement, and directed release of the deposited FDR amount to him.

What did the court decide?

Deposited amount (₹12,17,043/- in FDR) directed to be released to the respondent per order dated 06.03.2025.

North Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs Jai Pal Singh — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1330/2019

¶4

NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Divya Swamy, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

JAI PAL SINGH .....Respondent

¶7

Through: Ms. Kritika Matta and Ms. Tanya Rose, Advs. alongwith respondent in person

¶8

CORAM: REGISTRAR GENERAL KANWAL JEET ARORA

¶9

O R D E R % 28.03.2025

¶10

Vide order dated 06.03.2025, the Hon’ble Court has, inter alia , directed as under:-

¶11

“2. As a pre condition to grant interim protection, the predecessor bench directed the present non-applicant MCD to deposit 50% of the awarded amount with the Registry of this Court. The said amount was deposited in all the three writ petitions. Subsequently, vide judgment dated 04.07.2024, these writ petitions were dismissed by the predecessor bench. Now, through these applications, the applicants workmen seek release of the said amount.

¶12

3. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. Registry is directed to release the amounts deposited by the non-applicant MCD in these writ petitions to the applicants workmen after verifying their identity.”

¶13

As per office report, an amount of ₹12,17,043/- is lying deposited in this case in the shape of an FDR.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner today again submits that the

¶15

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 23:23:34

¶16

application of the respondent on which the aforesaid order has been passed by the Hon’ble Court was never received by the petitioner and as such the amount may not be released to the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has also preferred an appeal in this regard, which is still lying with the registry and is yet to be listed before the Hon’ble Court.

¶17

Learned counsel for the respondent who is present alongwith respondent in the court today has opposed the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, stating that the submissions are ill founded and are contrary to the record. It is further prayed by the learned counsel for the respondent that the present writ petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Hon’ble Court vide order dated 04.07.2024 and the Hon’ble Court vide order dated 06.03.2025 has now categorically directed the release of the deposited amount to the respondent. Accordingly, it is prayed that the deposited amount may kindly be released to the respondent in terms of the aforesaid order passed by the Hon’ble Court. Learned counsel for the respondent further submits that respondent is also ready to give statement in this court today in respect of the releasing of the amount to him.

¶18

I have perused the entire record and have given my thoughtful consideration to the aforesaid rival submissions of learned counsel for both the parties. Perusal of the record reveals that the writ petition filed by the petitioner admittedly has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Court vide order dated 04.07.2024. Further vide aforesaid order dated 06.03.2025 categorical directions have been passed by the Hon’ble Court regarding the release of the deposited amount to the respondent after a considerable wait till 4:00 pm on 06.03.2025. Needless to say, that this court now has to abide by the directions

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 23:23:34

¶21

passed by the Hon’ble Court and cannot delve upon the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding stopping the release of the deposited amount to the respondent, in the absence of any order contrary to this effect. The petitioner despite opportunity, since the last date of hearing, has also failed to approach the Hon’ble Court challenging the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble Court dated 06.03.2025 directing the release of the deposited amount to the respondent. Therefore, evidently the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner are sans merit and deserves to be rejected out rightly. The same are accordingly rejected devoid of any merits.

¶22

As such, this court is proceeding further to record the statement of respondent qua releasing the deposited amount to him. Statement of the respondent has been recorded separately to this effect and he has been identified by his counsel.

¶23

Accordingly, Registrar (B&A) is directed to release the deposited amount to respondent in terms of the order dated 06.03.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Court after due verification and receipt.

¶24

The order dated 06.03.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Court stands complied with.

¶25

KANWAL JEET ARORA REGISTRAR GENERAL

¶26

MARCH 28, 2025 ss

¶27

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 23:23:34

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Jai Pal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Jai Pal Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saspal Singh Vs Punjab and Sind Bank and Anr.

Datta Power Infra Private Limited Vs Solar Energy Corporation of India & Ors.

Rekha Shetty Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Hemant Bhardwaj Vs National E Assessment Centre & Ors.

Fareed Khan Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Anr.

Ambica Steels Limited (through Director) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(1) Delhi & Ors.

Ambica Steels Limited (through Director) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Delhi & Ors.

Ambica Steels Limited (through Director) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Delhi & Ors.

Debarati Bhunia Chakraborty Vs Suman Sankar Bhunia

Cement Corp. of India Ltd. Vs Prakash Veer Tomar & Ors.

Himanshu Sharma Vs Fiit Jee

North Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs Sh. Khem Chand

South Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs Satish Kumar & Anr.

North Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs Shri Dharm Pal and Ors.