Sh Sanjay Garg Secretary Icar and Anr. Vs Iari Stenographer… — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2025)

Sh Sanjay Garg Secretary Icar and Anr. Vs Iari Stenographer… — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal disposed of as withdrawn with the pending application; merits not gone into; liberty granted to the appellants to take recourse to such remedy as may be permissible and available in law, with the time spent before this Court to be considered towards limitation if the issue crops up; the interim order (in operation for about ten months) continued for a further period of four weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the present appeal under Sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is maintainable.

Court's answer

The Bench was of the considered view that an appeal under Sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is not maintainable, particularly having regard to the observations of the Supreme Court in Midnapore Peoples’ Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Chunilal Nanda, (2006) 5 SCC 399; on that basis it permitted the appellants to withdraw the appeal, while expressly leaving the merits untouched and granting liberty to pursue other available remedies.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Anish Dayal, JJ.) in CONT.APP.(C) 1/2025 (CM APPL. 1105/2025): In an appeal purportedly preferred under Sub-section (1) of Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Division Bench, being of the considered view that such an appeal is not maintainable — particularly having regard to the Supreme Court's observations in Midnapore Peoples' Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Chunilal Nanda, (2006) 5 SCC 399 — accepted, on instructions, the appellants' (Secretary, ICAR and another) prayer for withdrawal. The appeal was disposed of as withdrawn along with the pending application. The Court clarified it had not gone into, nor appreciated, the merits, left the appellants free to pursue any permissible and available remedy, and directed that time spent prosecuting the appeal before it be reckoned for limitation should that issue arise. The interim order, subsisting for about ten months, was continued for a further period of four weeks.

$~2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- CONT.APP.(C) 1/2025 & CM APPL. 1105/2025

SH SANJAY GARG SECRETARY ICAR AND ANR

.....Appellants Through: Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Praveen Swaroop, Mr. Prahlad Balaji, Ms. Simran Gupta, Mr. Varun Sharma and Ms. S. Singh, Advs.

versus

IARI STENOGRAPHER S WELFARE ASSOCIATION .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. S. Vinay Patnakar and Mr. Alok Raj, Advs.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R % 15.10.2025

Since we are of the considered view that the present appeal under Subsection (1) of Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is not maintainable, particularly having regard to the observations made by the Apex Court in Midnapore Peoples’ Coop. Bank Ltd. and Others v. Chunilal Nanda and Others (2006) 5 SCC 399, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, on instructions, made a prayer for withdrawal of the present appeal.

As such, the present appeal stands disposed of as withdrawn.

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 25/10/2025 at 11:22:23

We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case, nor have we appreciated the same.

It shall be open to the appellants to take recourse to such remedy as may be permissible and available in law.

While pursuing such remedy, the time spent before this Court in prosecuting the present appeal be considered in case the issue of limitation crops up.

As prayed by Mr. Sen , learned senior counsel for the appellants, since the interim order has been in operation for a period of about ten months, the same is continued for a further period of four weeks from today.

Pending application also stands disposed of.

NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J

ANISH DAYAL, J

OCTOBER 15, 2025/ sky/sk

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 25/10/2025 at 11:22:23