Disposed¶22

Mr. Satyendra Kumar v. Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma

Delhi HC20 Aug 2025CONT.CAS(C)/1584/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court; CONT.CAS(C) 1584/2024; contempt of courts; Section 12 Contempt of Courts Act 1971; non-compliance with writ directions; W.P.(C) 16636/2023 Satyendra Kumar v. Managing Committee of Maharaja Agarsain Public School; Directorate of Education; Deputy Director of Education; compliance affidavit 04.04.2025; order dated 18.02.2025; Justice Amit Sharma; petition disposed 20.08.2025.

What did the court decide?

No contempt proceedings initiated and no costs imposed; petition disposed of upon noting compliance, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to pursue remedies before the competent court. ¶22

Mr. Satyendra Kumar Vs Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No contempt proceedings initiated and no costs imposed; petition disposed of upon noting compliance, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to pursue remedies before the competent court.

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether contempt proceedings should be initiated against the respondent under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for non-compliance with this Court's directions dated 09.01.2024 in W.P.(C) 16636/2023, and whether exemplary cost and compensation should be imposed on him.

¶13

Court's answer

Compliance with the Court's directions dated 09.01.2024 in W.P.(C) 16636/2023 stands effected: the Directorate of Education treated the writ petition as the petitioner's representation and disposed of it vide order dated 18.02.2025 passed by the Deputy Director of Education.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

In view of the compliance so effected, the present contempt petition is disposed of, and pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶22

Key takeaways

If the petitioner is aggrieved with the aforesaid order (dated 18.02.2025), he is at liberty to avail of the remedy available to him before the Court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with law.obiter¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition (CONT.CAS(C) 1584/2024) under Section 2(b) read with Sections 10/12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 by Mr. Satyendra Kumar against Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma for alleged non-compliance with this Court's directions dated 09.01.2024 in W.P.(C) 16636/2023 (Mr. Satyendra Kumar v. Managing Committee of Maharaja Agarsain Public School & Anr.). A compliance affidavit dated 04.04.2025, filed with order dated 18.02.2025, showed that the Directorate of Education had treated the writ petition as the petitioner's representation and disposed of it by order of the Deputy Director of Education dated 18.02.2025. Holding the compliance complete, Amit Sharma, J. disposed of the petition and pending applications on 20.08.2025, leaving the petitioner at liberty to challenge the order dated 18.02.2025 before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶1

$~12

¶2

IN THEHIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 1584/2024

¶4

MR. SATYENDRA KUMAR .....Petitioner

¶5

Through:

¶6

versus

¶7

MR. VINOD KUMAR SHARMA .....Respondent Through: Ms. Latika C., Advocate.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶9

O R D E R % 20.08.2025

¶10

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶11

None appears on behalf of the petitioner.

¶12

The present petition under Section 2(b) read with Sections 10/12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeks following prayers:-

¶13

“ I. Pass an order/direction thereby initiating the contempt proceedings under section 12 of the Contempt of Court Act against the respondent for not complying with the directions of this Hon'ble Court dated 09.01.2024 issued in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 16636/2023 titled as Mr. Satyendra Kumar Versus Managing Committee of Maharaja Agarsain Public School & Anr. And ensure the compliance of the said order immediately. II. Respondent should be burdened with exemplary cost and compensation for compelling the petitioner to approach this Hon'ble Court.

¶14

III. Pass any other/further order/direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.”

¶15

Vide order dated 04.10.2024, learned Predecessor Bench of this Court had observed as under:-

¶16

“2. Learned counsel for the respondent/Directorate of Education is present. It is submitted that this Court had directed the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner after affording a hearing and pass a reasoned order in accordance with the law.

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

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 25/08/2025 at 11:48:16

¶19

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the petitioner has been called for a hearing, but he is deliberately not appearing before the competent authority. The aforesaid submission is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Nevertheless, it appears that the competent authority is seized of the matter and the appropriate decision would, in all probability, be taken within four weeks from today.”

¶20

Subsequently, a compliance affidavit dated 04.04.2025 on behalf of respondent No. 1 has been filed by Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Deputy Directorate of Education, Zone-10, Distt. North-West-A, BL-Block Shalimar Bagh alongwith order dated 18.02.2025.

¶21

It is stated in the said affidavit that in compliance with the directions passed vide order dated 09.01.2024 in W.P.(C) 16636/2023, the Directorate of Education has treated the said writ petition as representation and the same has been disposed of vide order dated 18.02.2025 passed by Deputy Director of Education.

¶22

In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of.

¶23

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶24

Needless to state that if the petitioner is aggrieved with the aforesaid order, he is at liberty to avail of the remedy available to him before the Court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with law.

¶25

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶26

AUGUST 20, 2025 /sn

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 25/08/2025 at 11:48:16

Mr. Satyendra Kumar v. Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Satyendra Kumar v. Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Shakti Sidh Peeth Sewa Samiti Vs Shri Subhasish Panda Vice Chairman DDA and Ors.

Krishan Lal Ahuja & Anr. Vs Sh Rajinder Kumar & Ors.

S.B. Tripathi Vs Pankaj Aggarwal & Ors.

Kiran and Anr. Vs Kaisar Parveen Officiating Chairperson Child Welfare Committee

Sukhbir Singh Randhawa Vs Jatinder Kaur Chabra and Ors.

Dr. Ritu Chowdhary Vs Prof. Mamta Sharma & Ors.

Radha Vs Sultan Chaudhary & Ors.

Dhruva Bhagat Vs Harsh Vardhan Agrawal

Shiv Shakti Sidh Peeth Sewa Samiti Vs Shri Subhasish Panda Vice Chairman DDA and Ors.

Krishan Lal Ahuja & Anr. Vs Sh Rajinder Kumar & Ors.

S.B. Tripathi Vs Pankaj Aggarwal & Ors.

Ram Chander Dhankar Vs Ashwani Kumar

Sudan Vs Anita Yadav

Tilak Raj Vs Manish Chander Verma, Sdm Rohini