Disposed

Rajesh Kumar Jain v. Chetan Prakash Jain & Anr.

Delhi HC14 Jan 2026CONT.CAS(C)/53/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petitions alleging wilful disobedience of directions to CEL to decide gratuity representation orders. CEL had passed speaking orders as directed; court found no disobedience and disposed of petitions, directing petitioners to challenge the orders in pending writs.

What did the court decide?

Exemption applications allowed; contempt petitions not entertained and disposed of; petitioners directed to pursue pending writ petitions challenging the speaking orders.

Rajesh Kumar Jain Vs Chetan Prakash Jain & Anr. — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~85, 86, 87

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 53/2026 and CM APPL.2138/2026 (85) RAJESH KUMAR JAIN .....Petitioner

¶4

versus

¶5

CHETAN PRAKASH JAIN & ANR .....Respondents

¶6

- CONT.CAS(C) 54/2026 (86) TRIBHUWAN SINGH AND ORS .....Petitioners versus

¶7

CHETAN PRAKASH JAIN AND ANR. .....Respondents

¶8

Through:

¶9

- CONT.CAS(C) 55/2026 and CM APPL.2211/2026 (u/O XXII R 3) (87) RAGHUNATH SINGH & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶10

versus

¶11

CHETAN PRAKASH JAIN & ANR. .....Respondents Through:

¶12

Presence :

¶13

Mr. Naved Khan, Adv. for petitioners in item nos.85, 86, 87.

¶14

Mr. Anil Mittal, Mr. Shaurya Mittal and Mr. Bhim Singh, Advs. for R-1 in item nos.85 to 87.

¶15

Ms. Shiva Lakshmi, Mr. Vikrant Malwal, GP and Mr. Madhav Bajaj, Adv. for UOI in item no.85.

¶16

Mr. Jitesh Vikram Srivastava, SPC and Mr. Prajesh Vikram Srivastava, Advs. for R-2 in item no.86 (through v/c)

¶17

Ms. Manisha Agarwal Narain, CGSC and Mr. Navneet Saharan, Adv. for R- 2 in item no.87.

¶18

CORAM:

¶19

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶20

O R D E R % 14.01.2026

¶21

CM APPL.2206/2026 (Exemption) in CONT.CAS(C) 54/2026 CM APPL.2212/2026 (Exemption) in CONT.CAS(C) 55/2026

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 17/01/2026 at 12:27:30

¶24

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶25

Applications stand disposed of.

¶26

CONT.CAS(C) 53/2026 CONT.CAS(C) 54/2026 CONT.CAS(C) 55/2026

¶27

The present petitions allege wilful disobedience of the directions contained in the judgment dated 17.09.2024 passed by this Court in W.P(C) 5942/2018 and judgment dated 26.11.2024 passed by this Court in W.P(C) 16319/2024. The operative directions in the judgement dated 17.09.2024 read as under:-

¶28

“18. In view of the limited relief now sought by the Petitioners and without entering into the merits of the inter se disputes, these writ petitions are disposed of leaving it open to the Petitioners to make a comprehensive representation(s) to CEL for reconsideration of the decision denying enhanced gratuity of Rs.20 lacs to the Petitioners in light of the submissions that may be made in the said representations and keeping in backdrop the judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand in Nawab Khan (Supra) which was upheld by the Supreme Court. As and when the representation(s) are received, the same shall be decided by CEL within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt and a reasoned and speaking order shall be passed thereon. Needless to state Petitioners will be at liberty to take recourse to legal remedies in case of any surviving grievance.”

¶29

The operative directions in the judgement dated 26.11.2024 read as under:-

¶30

“10. Accordingly, at this stage, without entering into the merits, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Respondent No. 2 to consider the representation dated 05.11.2024 pending with Respondent No. 2 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Needless to state that the decision will be taken keeping in view the enhancement in the upper limit of gratuity by way of amendment to the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1 972 as also the judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand in Nawab Khan (supra), which was upheld by the Supreme Court. While taking the decision, Respondent No. 2 will also take into consideration the Presidential Directive conveyed by Ministry

¶31

This is a digitally signed order.

¶32

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 17/01/2026 at 12:27:30

¶33

of Science &Technology to Respondent No. 2 vide letter dated 13.10.2010 and O.M. issued by DPE on 02.06.2010 as also minutes of 158thmeeting of Board of Directors of Respondent No. 2. A reasoned and speaking order shall be passed by Respondent No. 2, which shall be communicated to the Petitioners within one week from the date of the decision and Petitioners will be at liberty to take recourse to appropriate legal remedies, in case of any surviving grievance and if so advised.”

¶34

It transpires that pursuant to the above directions in both the judgments, speaking orders dated 11.03.2025 and 18.03.2025 have been passed by the Central Electronics Limited (CEL). The order dated 11.03.2025 holds, inter alia, as under:-

¶35

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 17/01/2026 at 12:27:30

¶36

This is a digitally signed order.

¶37

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 17/01/2026 at 12:27:30

¶38

The order dated 18.03.2025 holds, inter alia, as under:-

¶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 17/01/2026 at 12:27:30

¶41

This is a digitally signed order.

¶42

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 17/01/2026 at 12:27:30

¶43

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that although speaking orders dated 11.03.2025 and 18.03.2025 have been passed by CEL, the same are not in consonance with the dicta laid down in Nawab Khan v. Union of India & Others , Writ Petition (M/S) No. 891/2016 and connected matters. It also transpires that the petitioners have already taken legal recourse by assailing the aforesaid speaking orders by way of substantive writ petitions. 6. It transpires that the respondents have passed the aforesaid speaking

¶44

This is a digitally signed order.

¶45

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 17/01/2026 at 12:27:30

¶46

orders in terms of the directions contained in the judgments dated 17.09.2024 and 26.11.2024 respectively, and on a perusal of the said speaking orders, it cannot be said that there has been any wilful disobedience by the said respondents with the directions contained in the aforesaid judgments.

¶47

The petitioner is well within its rights to urge that the speaking orders are based on a clear misconception and misunderstanding of the law laid down in Nawab Khan (Supra). However, this is an aspect which is required to be urged by the petitioner in the writ petitions already filed.

¶48

In the factual conspectus, this Court is not inclined to entertain these contempt petitions. Accordingly, the present contempt petitions are disposed of.

¶49

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶50

JANUARY 14, 2026/ cl

¶51

This is a digitally signed order.

¶52

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 17/01/2026 at 12:27:30

Rajesh Kumar Jain v. Chetan Prakash Jain & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Jain v. Chetan Prakash Jain & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rathina Sabapathi, President, Party for the Right of Other Backward Classes Vs Election Commission of India Represented by the Ms Shubhra Saxena, Director

Maharaj Singh & Ors. Vs Chetan Prakash Jain & Anr.

Arvind Kumar Sharma Vs Govind Mohan and Anr.

Prasanna Kumari Vs Chetan Prakash Jain & Anr.

Abdul Malik Vs Tarun Kapoor

Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp & Anr. Vs Mr. Jayesh Mehta & Anr.

Afzal Chaudhary Vs Dr. Dilraj Kaur

Afsha Vs Station House Officer & Ors.

Rathina Sabapathi, President, Party for the Right of Other Backward Classes Vs Election Commission of India Represented by the Ms Shubhra Saxena, Director

Maharaj Singh & Ors. Vs Chetan Prakash Jain & Anr.

Arvind Kumar Sharma Vs Govind Mohan and Anr.

Deepak Puri & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ekta Abbot Vs Ankur Abbot

Shiv Lal & Ors. Vs Central Public Works Department(Cpwd) & Anr.