Petitioner sought redressal of his complaint; respondents reported that a restraint order was passed on the complaint. The court directed respondents to take the complaint to its logical conclusion and left petitioner free to seek legal recourse if grievances remained unaddressed.
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.
$~75
DIPAK BHATTACHARYA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Faiz Khan, Advocate.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF ` DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Vaishali Gupta, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 23.02.2026
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J
FEBRUARY 23, 2026 aks/ap
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 25/02/2026 at 15:35:13
Dipak Bhattacharya
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi
Anr.
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
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
