Contempt petition filed regarding continued suspension of a teacher after criminal acquittal. Court observed the school revoked the suspension and disposed the matter noting no further orders were required.
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.
$~9
CNR No. DLHC010285972026
SHAILENDRA MOHAN UPADHYAYA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Yaduven Rao, Advocate.
versus
DELHI POLICE PUBLIC SCHOOL & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Manish Gupta with Mr. Prateek Gupta, Ms. Sowmya China, Ms. Riya, Ms. Shipra Bhardwaj and Ms. Payal Singh, Advocates. (M): 9205972528
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
MINI PUSHKARNA, J (ORAL):
2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was appointed as Trained Graduate Teacher (TGT) Physical Education with respondent no.1 (for short ‘school’). The petitioner was relieved from duties on 09.07.2001. The petitioner was successful in challenging the order dated 09.07.2001 and the order was upheld up to the Supreme Court. In October, 2015, the petitioner was
Signature Not Verified
Page 1 of 5
Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.08.2026 18:15:13
reinstated. On 04.08.2023, FIR No.226/2023 was registered at P.S. Safdarjung Enclave under Sections 354 and 506 IPC & Section 10 of the POCSO Act and the petitioner was arrested. On 16.08.2023, the impugned order of suspension was passed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was acquitted on 16.05.2025 in criminal case arising from FIR No.226/2023, yet the suspension continued.
4. Learned counsel for the school submits that vide communication dated 05.06.2025, the petitioner was directed to submit the documents mentioned therein but till date the needful has not been done.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from the client present in court as identified by learned counsel, submits that the documents asked for in pursuance to communication dated 05.06.2025 shall be submitted by 04.11.2025.
6. Learned counsel for school submits that the documents are asked for to reveal as to whether the allegations in the criminal case were similar as in the departmental proceedings or not.
7. Without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with direction that in the eventuality of the petitioner filing a response to the communication dated 05.06.2025 and complying with the directions therein, the respondents within two weeks of receipt of response shall consider the matter and pass a speaking order with regard to the suspension of the petitioner.
8. Needless to say that the petitioner shall be at liberty to avail remedies in accordance with law, if aggrieved of the decision.”
Signature Not Verified
Page 2 of 5
Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.08.2026 18:15:13
handed over to this Court, orders dated 06th August, 2026, passed by them, which read as under:
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.08.2026 18:15:13
Page 3 of 5
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.08.2026 18:15:13
Page 4 of 5
in the present matter.
MINI PUSHKARNA, J
AUGUST 14, 2026 c
Signature Not Verified
Page 5 of 5
Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 7.08.2026 18:15:13
SHAILENDRA MOHAN UPADHYAYA
DELHI POLICE PUBLIC SCHOOL
ANR
MINI PUSHKARNA
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
