Azher Nisar Shervani Vs Vijendra Kumar, Deputy Director (Horticulture), DDA — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Azher Nisar Shervani Vs Vijendra Kumar, Deputy Director (Horticulture), DDA — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief to the Appellant on the merits of the Appeal; the Appeal was dismissed. Ancillary disposals in the same order: exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions (paras 1-2) and delay in filing and re-filing the accompanying Appeal condoned (para 3).

Issue for consideration

Whether the present intra-court appeal (LPA) against the learned Single Judge's order dismissing the Contempt Petition can be maintained/proceeds, given that an intra-court appeal against an order passed in contempt proceedings is not maintainable unless the Contempt Court issues a direction or passes an order touching the inter-se merits. +1 more

Court's answer

The Impugned Order needs no interference; accordingly, the Appeal is dismissed.

Ratio / Principle

On the date of the Impugned Order, contempt jurisdiction vested in the learned Single Judge who passed it; whether the Contempt Petition was to be transferred to another Bench was a discretion that belonged to him and was rightly exercised. The Court therefore could not agree with the Appellant's submission that the said refusal made the present LPA maintainable.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court, Division Bench (Chief Justice DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA with TEJAS KARIA, J.), order dated 12.05.2026 in LPA 351/2026 (Azher Nisar Shervani v. Vijendra Kumar, Deputy Director (Horticulture), DDA): dismisses the appeal challenging the Single Judge's order dated 14.01.2026 in Cont. Cas (C) No.8/2026 dismissing the Appellant's Contempt Petition. Relying on Midnapore Peoples’ Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Chunilal Nanda, (2006) 5 SCC 399, the Court records that an intra-court appeal against an order passed in contempt proceedings is not maintainable unless the Contempt Court issues a direction or passes an order touching the inter-se merits. The Court holds that the refusal to transfer the Contempt Petition to the Bench where the Writ Petition was pending was a discretion vested in the Single Judge holding contempt jurisdiction and was rightly exercised; the Impugned Order therefore needs no interference. Ancillary: exemption application allowed subject to all just exceptions; delay in filing and re-filing condoned.

$~31

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- LPA 351/2026

AZHER NISAR SHERVANI .....Appellant Through: Mr. P.S. Bindra, Sr. Adv. with Mr. N.S. Arora & Mr. Manish Khurana, Advs.

Versus

VIJENDRA KUMAR, DEPUTY DIRECTOR (HORTICULTURE), DDA .....Respondent Through: Mr. R.K. Dhawan, Ms. Manisha Dhawan, Mr. V.K. Teng & Mr. Pawan Karan Deo, Advs.

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

O R D E R % 12.05.2026

CM No.31755/2026 (Exemption)

Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The Application stands disposed of.

CM Nos.31756/2026 & 31757/2026

Having heard the learned Counsel for the Parties, the delay in filing and re-filing the accompanying Appeal is condoned.

The Applications stand disposed of.

LPA 351/2026

Heard the learned Counsel for the Parties.

The present Appeal seeks to challenge the order dated 14.01.2026 (“ Impugned Order ”) passed by the learned Single Judge in Cont. Cas (C) No.8/2026 (“ Contempt Petition ”) whereby the Contempt Petition has been dismissed.

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 16/05/2026 at 12:11:08

In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Midnapore Peoples’ Coop. Bank Ltd. v. Chunilal Nanda, (2006) 5 SCC 399 , an intracourt appeal against an order passed in contempt proceedings is not maintainable unless the Contempt Court issues any direction or passes an order touching upon the inter-se merit of the case between the parties.

The learned Counsel for the Appellant draws our attention to Paragraph No.11 of the Impugned Order dated 14.01.2026 whereby the prayer made by the Appellant before the learned Single Judge to transfer the Contempt Petition before the Bench where the Writ Petition was pending was refused. In the wake of the said refusal, the learned Counsel for the Appellant states that the instant LPA would be maintainable.

We are afraid, we cannot agree with the submission made by the learned Counsel for the Appellant. On the date of passing of the Impugned Order, the contempt jurisdiction was with the learned Single Judge, who has passed the order and, accordingly, as to whether the Contempt Petition was to be transferred to some other bench or not is the discretion, which has rightly been exercised by the learned Single Judge while passing the Impugned Order.

In view of the above, the Impugned Order needs no interference. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed.

DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ

TEJAS KARIA, J

MAY 12, 2026 ‘gsr’

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 16/05/2026 at 12:11:08