Petitioner sought directions for compliance with the court's earlier judgment dated 17 September 2025, which had not specified a time frame and remained unimplemented. The court directed respondents to comply within four weeks and allowed the application to that extent.
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.
$~76
BIRANDER SINGH EX DC .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Naushad Alam, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vijay Joshi, CGSC with Mr. Vivek Nagar, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
O R D E R % 13.10.2025
CM APPL. 64338/2025 (direction)
1. This is an application filed by the petitioner pointing out that, in our judgment dated 17 September 2025, no time frame has been specified for compliance, by the respondents, with the directions contained in the judgment. It is submitted that, as a result, the judgment has not been implemented.
2. We, therefore, direct the respondents to ensure compliance of the judgment dated 17 September 2025 within four weeks from today.
3. The application is allowed to the above extent.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J
OCTOBER 13, 2025/pa
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 16/10/2025 at 14:31:17
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a time frame should be fixed for compliance with the judgment dated 17 September 2025.
Birander Singh Ex DC
Union of India & Ors.
C. Hari Shankar
Om Prakash Shukla
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
