Disposed¶21

Prahlad Arya v. Prudence School Dwarka and Ors.

Delhi HC11 Aug 2025LPA/515/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

LPA 515/2025; Prahlad Arya v. Prudence School Dwarka and Ors.; Delhi High Court order dated 11.08.2025; withdrawal of appeal against Single Judge order dated 01.07.2025 in W.P.(C) 8718/2025; maintainability of appeal tested against Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania, (1981) 4 SCC 8; opportunity of personal hearing before Director of Education; CM APPL. 49215/2025 (Exemption) allowed; no observations on merits.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the appeal granted; appeal disposed of as withdrawn along with pending application(s), if any; CM APPL. 49215/2025 (Exemption) allowed subject to all just exceptions; Director of Education left open to give personal hearing if rules provide for it or if there is a practice thereof; no observations made on the merits. ¶21

Prahlad Arya Vs Prudence School Dwarka and Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the Order dated 01.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 8718/2025 meets the parameters of a judgment against which an LPA would lie, as laid down by the Apex Court in Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania, (1981) 4 SCC 8. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

Permission sought by the Appellant's counsel to withdraw the appeal is granted.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

CM APPL. 49215/2025 (Exemption) is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

Key takeaways

The appeal is disposed of as withdrawn, along with pending application(s), if any.ratio¶21
It is open for the Director of Education to give an opportunity of personal hearing to the Appellant if the rules provide for it or if there is a practice of giving an opportunity of personal hearing.ratio¶19
Since the appeal was withdrawn on a suggestion given by this Court, the Court has not made any observations on the merits of the case.obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Division Bench: Subramonium Prasad and Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.) — LPA 515/2025, Prahlad Arya v. Prudence School Dwarka and Ors., decided 11.08.2025: Challenging the Single Judge's order dated 01.07.2025 in W.P.(C) 8718/2025, the appeal was disposed of as withdrawn. Upon the Bench's suggestion, with reference to Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania, (1981) 4 SCC 8, that the impugned order might not meet the parameters of a judgment against which an LPA would lie, counsel sought and was granted permission to withdraw. CM APPL. 49215/2025 (Exemption) was allowed subject to all just exceptions. It was left open to the Director of Education to give the Appellant an opportunity of personal hearing if the rules provide for it or if there is a practice of doing so. The Court expressly recorded that, having withdrawn on its suggestion, no observations were made on the merits.

¶1

$~44

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- LPA 515/2025

¶4

PRAHLAD ARYA .....Appellant

¶5

Through: Mr. Khagesh B. Jha and Ms. Shikha Sharma Bagga, Mr. Ankit Mann, Ms. Jyoti Shokeen and Ms. Amisha, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

PRUDENCE SCHOOL DWARKA AND ORS .....Respondents Through:

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 11.08.2025 CM APPL. 49215/2025 (Exemption)

¶12

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶13

LPA 515/2025 & CM APPL. 49214/2025

¶14

The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant challenging the Order dated 01.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 8718/2025.

¶15

When this Court made a suggestion to the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant that the Impugned Order which is under challenge in the present appeal might not meet the parameters of a judgment against which an LPA would lie as laid down by the Apex Court in Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania, (1981) 4 SCC 8 , the learned Counsel for the Appellant

¶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 18/08/2025 at 12:25:47

¶18

seeks permission to withdraw the present appeal. However, he states that when the Appellant approaches the Director of Education, he should be given an opportunity of personal hearing.

¶19

It is open for the Director of Education to give an opportunity of personal hearing to the Appellant if the rules provide for it or if there is a practice of giving an opportunity of personal hearing.

¶20

Permission, as sought for, is granted.

¶21

The appeal is disposed of as withdrawn, along with pending application(s), if any.

¶22

It is made clear that since the learned Counsel for the Appellant has withdrawn the appeal on a suggestion given by this Court, this Court has not made any observations on the merits of the case.

¶23

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶24

SAURABH BANERJEE, J

¶25

AUGUST 11, 2025 S. Zakir

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 18/08/2025 at 12:25:47

Prahlad Arya v. Prudence School Dwarka and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prahlad Arya v. Prudence School Dwarka and 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs Ashok Kumar

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs Dheer Singh

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs Sh Ram Kishan

Badan Singh Vs Director General, Indo Tibetan Border Police Force & Ors.

The Management of Patel Integrated Logistics Limited Vs Satbir Singh & Anr.

Sepoy/Gd Diwakar Saroj Vs Union of India and Ors.