Amit Juyal v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC12 Sept 2025CONT.CAS(C)/513/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Contempt of Courts Act 1971 S.12; contempt petition; wilful disobedience; W.P.(C) 14789/2022 judgment dated 19.10.2022; Sowmya T. Gupta v. DTC, W.P.(C) No. 2674/2020 (13.03.2020); NALSA v. Union of India (2014) 5 SCC 438; Rajive Raturi v. Union of India (2018) 2 SCC 413; transgender persons; free bus passes; DTC cluster feeder buses; Delhi Metro; GNCTD; Joint Commissioner (BT) Transport Department; cabinet note; Minister (Transport); petition not pressed; liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings; disposed as not pressed; Delhi High Court 12.09.2025; Amit Sharma, J.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as not pressed; leave and liberty granted to the petitioner to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law subject to the decision taken by the Cabinet; pending application, if any, also disposed of.

Amit Juyal Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶46

Issue for consideration

Whether contempt proceedings should be initiated against the Respondents for the wilful disobedience of the Judgment dated 19th October 2022 rendered by this Court in W.P.(C) 14789/2022, and whether appropriate directions should be issued for compliance of that judgment. +1 more

¶¶13

Court's answer

In view of the status of the proposal (sent and pending with the Cabinet), the petitioner did not press the contempt petition, and was granted liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law subject to the decision taken by the Cabinet.

¶¶44

Ratio / Principle

Leave and liberty was granted to the petitioner.

¶¶45

Key takeaways

The present petition is disposed of as not pressed, and the pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.ratio¶¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (CONT.CAS(C) 513/2023, Delhi High Court, decided 12.09.2025 by Amit Sharma, J.) by Amit Juyal against GNCTD & Ors., alleging wilful disobedience of the Division Bench judgment dated 19.10.2022 in W.P.(C) 14789/2022. That judgment, relying on the earlier Division Bench order dated 13.03.2020 in W.P.(C) No. 2674/2020 (Sowmya T. Gupta v. Department of DTC) and on NALSA v. Union of India (2014) 5 SCC 438 and Rajive Raturi v. Union of India (2018) 2 SCC 413, had disposed of the PIL with a direction to the Respondents to take a decision on the representation (free-of-cost travel/reservation for transgender persons in DTC/cluster/feeder buses and Delhi Metro) within 4 months. Status report dated 08.09.2025 by Joint Commissioner (BT), Transport Department: after formation of the new government in Feb 2025, a draft cabinet note on free bus passes to transgender persons was put up to the Minister (Transport) in March 2025; the Minister returned it with comments that free travel for the transgender community in DTC-operated buses should follow the same pattern as given to ladies; the department was working on the revised proposal for submission within a week; the major policy decision needed inter-departmental consultations and Cabinet approval. Counsel for the respondent, on instructions of the Joint Commissioner present in Court, submitted the proposal had been sent and was pending with the Cabinet. The petitioner thereupon did not press the petition with liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law subject to the Cabinet's decision; leave and liberty was granted; the petition was disposed of as not pressed and pending applications disposed of.

¶1

$~32

¶2

IN THEHIGH COURTOF DELHIAT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 513/2023

¶4

AMIT JUYAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Arkaneil Bhaumik & Mr. Siddharth Jain, Advs. (through VC).

¶5

versus

¶6

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Abhinav Sharma & Mr.Shubham, Advs. for R-2 with Mr. Aom Dhole, Joint Commissioner. Ms. Rikky Gupta, Standing Counsel for DTC with Ms. Ananya Singh,Adv. (through VC).

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 12.09.2025

¶11

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶12

The present petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeks the following prayers:-

¶13

“a. Initiate Contempt proceedings against the Respondents for the wilful disobedience of the Judgment dated 19th October 2022, rendered by this Hon’ble Court in W.P.(C) 14789/2022. b. Issue appropriate directions to the Respondents for the compliance of the Judgment dated 19^th October 2022, rendered by this Hon’ble Court in W.P.(C) 14789/2022.

¶14

c. Pass any other orders that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

¶15

Vide order dated 19.10.2022, learned Division Bench passed the

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 15/09/2025 at 12:21:23

¶18

following order:-

¶19

“Dr. Amit George, at the outset, has drawn the attention of this Court towards an order dated 13.03.2020, passed in W.P.(C) No. 2674/2020, Sowmya T. Gupta v. Department of Delhi Transport Corporation (Through its Chairperson) and Another and his contention is that earlier also a Division Bench of this Court, while dealing with the similar issue, has directed the Respondents therein to take a practical decision in the matter as expeditiously as possible. The aforesaid order reads as under:

¶20

“1. This Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been preferred with the following prayers:

¶21

“a. For a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the Respondent No. 1 to reserve seats for transgender persons in the DTC, cluster, feeder and mini buses plied by Respondent No. 1;

¶22

b. For a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to Respondent No. 1 to provide free-of-cost travel to transgender passengers in the DTC, cluster, feeder and mini buses plied by Respondent No. 1; c. For a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the Respondent No. 2 to reserve seats for transgender persons in the Delhi Metro trains plied by Respondent No. 2;

¶23

d. For any such other and suitable order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of

¶24

justice.”

¶25

2. Having heard counsel of both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the petitioner has placed reliance upon the decisions reported in National Legal Services Authority vs. Union of India and Others 2014 (5) SCC 438 and in Rajive Raturi vs. Union of India and Others 2018 (2) SCC 413, for reservation of seats and providing free of cost travel to transgenders in Delhi Transport Corporation buses, cluster buses,feeder buses and mini buses, plied by respondent no. 1 as well as for reservation of seats for transgender in Delhi Metro Rail Corporation/respondent no. 2.

¶26

3. We, therefore, direct the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to

¶27

treat this writ petition as a representation and decide the same in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policies as applicable to the facts of the case and also keeping in the mind

¶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 15/09/2025 at 12:21:23

¶30

the aforesaid decisions, upon which reliance has been placed by the counsel for the petitioner. Representations have already been preferred by the petitioner, which are annexed as Annexures P-1 and P-2 to the memo of this writ petition. The decision will be taken by the respondent nos. 1 and 2 as expeditiously as possible and practicable.

¶31

4. In view of these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.”

¶32

Dr. Amit George has stated that though the order was passed on 30.03.2020, till date, the Government has not taken any decision in the matter and, therefore, time period be fixed by this Court in the matter.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for the GNCTD was fair enough in stating before this Court that an order has been passed earlier in a similar Writ Petition and the Government will certainly take a practical decision as expeditiously as possible.

¶34

Resultantly, without averting to the merits of the case, the PIL is disposed of with a direction to the Respondents to take a decision, as directed earlier, as expeditiously as possible, and in a practical manner within a period of 4 months from today. However, it is made clear that the Petitioner shall be at liberty to approach this Court in case any adverse order is passed, or in case he is still aggrieved.

¶35

Dr. Amit George has stated before this Court that the representation which has to be decided in the present case is marked as Annexure P1. Let the same be decided by the Respondents in the time period so stipulated.”

¶36

Pursuance thereto, status report on behalf of respondent no.2, dated 08.09.2025 authored by Joint Commissioner (BT) Transport Department has been placed on record, wherein it has been recorded as under:-

¶37

“After formation of new government in Delhi in the month of Feb, 2025, a draft cabinet note regarding issuance of free bus passes to transgender persons on all routes in all DTC, Cluster & Feeder Buses was put up to the Hon'ble Minister (Transport) in March, 2025 to accord his approval to place the proposal before the cabinet for taking a policy decision in the matter.

¶38

However, the Hon 'ble Minister (Transport) returned the proposal with

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

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 15/09/2025 at 12:21:23

¶41

the comments that "the proposal to provide the free travel to Transgender Community in buses operated by DTC should be on the same pattern as being given to ladies in Delhi. An addendum to Cabinet note passed earlier on the matter may be considered "

¶42

The department is accordingly working on the proposal. The revised proposal will be submitted to the Govt. within a week This matter being a major policy decision with financial & operational implications needs inter-departmental consultations & Cabinet approval. The matter is now in advanced stage of finalization.”

¶43

Learned counsel for the respondent, on instructions of Joint Commissioner, who is present in Court, submits that the proposal has been sent which is now pending with the Cabinet.

¶44

In view of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner, does not press this petition with liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law subject to the decision taken by the Cabinet.

¶45

Leave and liberty granted.

¶46

The present petition is disposed of as not pressed.

¶47

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.

¶48

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶49

SEPTEMBER 12, 2025 / nk/dj

¶50

This is a digitally signed order.

¶51

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 15/09/2025 at 12:21:23

Amit Juyal v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Juyal v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs Harinder Sachdev Vs Dr Nikhil Sinha & Anr. & Ors.

Malkhan Vs Arun Kumar Jha & Anr.

Pancha Devi Vs Arun Kumar Jha & Anr.

Munni Lal Vs Arun Kumar Jha

Praveen Kumar and Others Vs Mr Mekala Chaitanya Prasad IAS

Santosh Singh and Ors. Vs Shri Ashwani Kumar and Anr.

St Stephens College Vs Mohd Yasin

Pranav Saxena Vs Nisha Saxena

Mrs Harinder Sachdev Vs Dr Nikhil Sinha & Anr. & Ors.

Malkhan Vs Arun Kumar Jha & Anr.

Pancha Devi Vs Arun Kumar Jha & Anr.

Deepali Aggarwal Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Dilshad Ahmad Saifi Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

S S and Company Vs Sh Mohan Kumar