Delhi High Court

28,224 judgments

Year:

Chandan Prajapati v. Suresh Kumar Azad

14 Dec 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1486-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's order setting aside disciplinary proceedings for failure to prove documents through witnesses, reaffirming that documents alone cannot establish charges in departmental inquiries.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant departmental disciplinary proceedings proof of documents quasi-judicial inquiry witness testimony

Sanjay Tyagi v. Delhi Development Authority

25 Nov 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7082
Cites 1 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court appointed an arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and directed disputes to be resolved under the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, overruling an unworkable arbitration clause.

civil petition_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) Appointment of arbitrator Delhi International Arbitration Centre

M/S Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd v. Manav Sethi & Anr.

15 Nov 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5255

A Section 21 notice invoking arbitration is mandatory before filing a Section 11(6) petition for appointment of an arbitrator; absence of such notice renders the petition not maintainable.

arbitration appeal_dismissed Significant Section 21 notice Section 11(6) petition Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Unilateral appointment of arbitrator

National Highway Authority of India v. GVK Jaipur Expressway Pvt. Ltd.

09 Nov 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:8818

The Delhi High Court upheld an arbitral award granting compensation to a toll operator for loss of revenue due to statutory suspension of toll collection following demonetization, holding the event constituted a change in law under the concession agreement.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Change in Law Concession Agreement Demonetization Toll Collection

Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. v. General Secretary, All India Kamgar Union

26 Oct 2016 · Chandra Dhari Singh · 2024:DHC:1946

The Delhi High Court set aside a labor commissioner's award directing equal pay to contract workers, holding that no employer-employee relationship existed between the principal employer and contractor's employees performing dissimilar work.

labor appeal_allowed Significant equal pay for equal work contract labour principal to principal contract employer-employee relationship

Delhi Police v. Ajit Singh

25 Oct 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2024 SCC OnLine Del 8862
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld that acquittal on benefit of doubt in criminal proceedings bars departmental action under Rule 12 of DPPAR, leading to quashing of disciplinary proceedings and reinstatement of the police officer.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant acquittal on benefit of doubt departmental proceedings Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeals) Rules, 1980 Rule 12 DPPAR

Sub-Inspector Deovert Upadhyay & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

25 Oct 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:2921-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Delhi High Court held that downward pay fixation without notice and recovery of excess payments beyond five years are impermissible, quashing such orders against CISF Assistant Sub Inspectors.

administrative petition_allowed Significant downward pay fixation recovery of excess payment notice requirement Fundamental Rule 27

Dr. B.K. Tiwari v. Union of India

07 Oct 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:691-DB
Cites 5 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking pay parity for Advisor (Nutrition) with Advisor (Ayurveda) and Advisor (Homeopathy), upholding the 5th Central Pay Commission's pay scale recommendations and emphasizing judicial restraint in pay fixation matters.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant pay parity Advisor Nutrition Advisor Ayurveda Advisor Homeopathy

Ved Prakash Lamba v. Satyapal Lamba

24 Sep 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:797
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed a second appeal in a joint property dispute, holding that concurrent factual findings on joint possession and injunctions cannot be disturbed absent a substantial question of law.

civil appeal_dismissed second appeal Section 100 CPC substantial question of law joint ownership

Scrum Alliance, Inc v. Mr. Prem Kumar S. & Ors.

22 Sep 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:8346
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the defendants infringed the plaintiff's registered Certification Trade Marks "CERTIFIED SCRUMMASTER" and "CSM" by unauthorized use of identical and deceptively similar marks and logos, granting injunction against the defendants.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Certification Trade Mark Trade Marks Act 1999 Section 75 infringement Section 76(3) protection

Gopakumar Gopinathen v. Bergen Associates P Ltd

20 Aug 2016 · Tara Vitasta Ganju · 2025:DHC:4881

The Delhi High Court upheld the trial court’s order dismissing the petitioner’s application challenging territorial jurisdiction based on an exclusive jurisdiction clause in the service contract, dismissing the petition under Section 115 CPC.

civil petition_dismissed Significant exclusive jurisdiction clause Order VII Rule 11 CPC Section 115 CPC territorial jurisdiction

B.K. College v. National Council for Teacher Education

01 Jul 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:3370

The Delhi High Court set aside the withdrawal of recognition of a teacher education institution for procedural lapses and directed fresh inspection and due process before any adverse action.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant NCTE recognition withdrawal Teacher Education Institution shifting premises Section 17(1) NCTE Act show cause notice

Union of India & Anr v. Shri R K Nim

15 Jun 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8582-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 8

The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of disciplinary proceedings against a government servant for lack of approval of the chargesheet by the Disciplinary Authority, reaffirming the distinct and mandatory requirement of such approval under Rule 14 CCS (CCA) Rules and Article 311 of the Constitution.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings chargesheet approval Rule 14 CCS (CCA) Rules Article 311 Constitution

Dr. Jyoti Golani v. Union of India & Ors.

31 May 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1347-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 42

The Delhi High Court restored the Tribunal’s order granting a dental doctor the benefit of enhanced superannuation age of 65 years with retrospective effect, holding that review jurisdiction was misused and parity among government doctors mandates equal treatment.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant age of superannuation Central Health Services Delhi Administration parity

Dalip Kumar v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

30 May 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1472-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that recovery of amounts from an employee’s retiral benefits within one year of retirement without consent is illegal, modifying the Tribunal’s order to refund ₹2,21,036 to the petitioner with interest.

administrative petition_allowed Significant recovery from retiral benefits forfeiture of service pay refixation State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih

EDCIL India Ltd v. G L Sagar

05 May 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1605-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that a disagreement note in disciplinary proceedings must be tentative and not conclusively determine guilt, quashing the dismissal order and remanding for fresh proceedings.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant disagreement note disciplinary proceedings natural justice tentative opinion

Suraj Prakash Sharma v. Delhi Transport Corporation

28 Apr 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Girish Kathpalia · 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3217
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court held that DTC employees originally appointed as Drivers who suffer disabilities and are posted to alternate duties without fresh appointment orders are entitled to retirement benefits up to age 60 without annual medical fitness tests, applying the Supreme Court's Ram Phal precedent.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 retirement age Delhi Transport Corporation disability

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI v. NEERAJ KUMAR

08 Apr 2016 · C. HARI SHANKAR; SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN · 2024:DHC:8336-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 14

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's quashing of a police constable's dismissal without departmental inquiry under Article 311(2)(b), holding that mere gravity of charges does not justify dispensing with inquiry absent objective material showing impracticability.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Article 311(2)(b) Constitution of India Departmental inquiry Dismissal without inquiry Reasonably practicable

Sanjiv Kumar Saxena et al. v. Suresh Kumar Meena

08 Apr 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:921-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court upheld the grant of one grace mark to an ST candidate in a departmental exam, affirming the binding nature of the 1996 grace marks policy and rejecting selective application of relaxation.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Limited Departmental Competitive Examination grace marks Scheduled Tribes reservation

Ajor Kumar v. M/S FORE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT, NEW DELHI

31 Mar 2016 · Rekha Palli; Rajnish Bhatnagar · 2024:DHC:1203-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the termination of a probationer’s services without inquiry or show cause notice, holding that principles of natural justice do not apply to non-stigmatic termination during probation.

labor appeal_dismissed Significant probationer termination natural justice audi alteram partem non-stigmatic termination