Delhi High Court

28,224 judgments

Year:

Sarika v. Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board

20 Dec 2008 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1189-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the DSSSB's discretion to fix minimum qualifying marks for reserved category candidates and dismissed the petition challenging non-selection despite appearing in the merit list.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant DSSSB minimum qualifying marks reserved category selection process

Annabelle Analista Malibago v. DRI

16 Oct 2008 · Jasmeet Singh · 2025:DHC:2063

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and 10-year sentence under Section 21(c) of the NDPS Act, holding that minor procedural discrepancies do not undermine the consistent and corroborated prosecution evidence of heroin possession.

criminal appeal_dismissed NDPS Act Section 21(c) Section 67 NDPS contraband recovery

ITC Limited v. The Deputy Registrar of Trademarks and Ors.

29 Sep 2008 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:7863
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court restored ITC's trademark opposition and cancelled the registration of "LUCKY NINE" after holding that the opposition was wrongly treated as abandoned despite ITC's timely expression to rely on its grounds.

intellectual_property petition_allowed Significant trademark opposition notice of opposition evidence filing extension of time

G D Goenka Pvt Ltd v. Dinodia Educational Society

17 Sep 2008 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7401
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act for lack of territorial jurisdiction, holding that the court first seized of a Section 9 application under Section 42 has exclusive jurisdiction over subsequent arbitration-related proceedings.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant Section 9 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Section 42 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 territorial jurisdiction cause of action

Union of India v. Vinay Kumar

18 Aug 2008 · V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:9134-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 12

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order allowing deputation period to count towards residency for promotion under the Flexible Complementary Scheme, clarifying the applicability of the 2013 Rules excluding deputationists from FCS eligibility.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant deputation period absorption Flexible Complementary Scheme in-situ promotion

North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. R&T Enterprises

08 Aug 2008 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5771

Delhi High Court upheld arbitral award awarding compensation and interest to contractor for delayed site handover and payments by Municipal Corporation, dismissing challenge on limitation and evidentiary grounds.

civil petition_dismissed Significant arbitration agreement appointment of arbitrator limitation fundamental breach

Center for Research Planning and Action v. National Medicinal Plants Board Ministry of Ayush Government of India

09 Jul 2008 · Yashwant Varma; Dharmesh Sharma · 2025:DHC:15-DB

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal and reinstated the arbitral award, holding that judicial interference under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is limited and the award by an expert arbitrator was not patently illegal or against public policy.

commercial_arbitration appeal_allowed Significant arbitral award Section 34 Arbitration Act patent illegality public policy of India

Bhagwan Singh v. Union of India and Ors.

31 Dec 2007 · V. Kameswar Rao; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2023:DHC:6287-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 4

The Delhi High Court held that a retired employee found fit by a DPC is entitled to notional promotion and pensionary benefits even if actual promotion is denied due to retirement before the DPC.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant notional promotion Departmental Promotion Committee retired employee pensionary benefits

Mr. Shivam Tiwari; Ms. Urmila Sharma; Ms. Deepika Kalra; Ms. Venni Kakkar v. OM PRAKASH

18 Dec 2007 · C. Hari Shankar; Amit Mahajan · 2025:DHC:76-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal’s order directing payment of interest on delayed leave encashment benefits, holding that withholding such benefits requires a specific decision under Rule 39(3) CCS Leave Rules and that interest can be awarded for unreasonable delay even without statutory provision.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant leave encashment withholding pension disciplinary proceedings criminal conviction

Krishan Kumar & Anr v. Shakuntla Agency Pvt Ltd

22 Oct 2007 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:5521

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition challenging an arbitral award for specific performance, holding that the petitioners' failure to participate and raise objections during arbitration precluded reappreciation of facts under Section 34.

civil petition_dismissed Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 34 challenge Specific performance Agreement to sell

Krishan Kumar & Anr v. Shakuntla Agency Pvt Ltd

22 Oct 2007 · C. Hari Shankar · 2025:DHC:639

The Delhi High Court dismissed the review petition, holding that an arbitral award cannot be challenged on grounds of documents not placed before the tribunal and refused to remand the matter for reconsideration.

civil petition_dismissed Significant Arbitral Award Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Patent Illegality Public Policy

The Commissioner of Police Delhi v. Inspr Prem Singh

28 Sep 2007 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:671-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the Tribunal's order directing grant of ACP and MACP benefits to a police officer from the dates of eligibility, holding that censure punishments cannot defer such benefits beyond six months.

service_law appeal_dismissed Significant Assured Career Progression Scheme Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme financial upgradation censure punishment

Ravi Kumar Sinha v. The Commissioner of Income Tax

27 Apr 2007 · Yashwant Varma; Ravinder Dudeja · 2024:DHC:6076-DB
Cites 0 · Cited by 6

The Delhi High Court held that shares allotted under an ESPS subject to lock-in cannot be valued at market price for taxation; FMV must reflect transfer restrictions, and notional benefits during lock-in are not taxable income.

tax appeal_allowed Significant Employees Stock Purchase Scheme Fair Market Value lock-in period perquisite valuation

R. S. Meena v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

12 Apr 2007 · C. Hari Shankar; Sudhir Kumar Jain · 2024:DHC:8431-DB

The Delhi High Court held that officers assigned current duty charge of higher posts are not entitled to the higher pay scale unless formally appointed, remanding a related pay claim for fresh consideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Fundamental Rule 49 current duty charge look after charge pay scale entitlement

Joseph Varghese v. Union of India & Ors.

30 Mar 2007 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2023:DHC:6955

The Delhi High Court directed payment of ex-gratia compensation to the family of a blood bank Quality Manager who died of COVID-19, holding that employees in designated COVID-19 hospitals performing duties exposing them to infection qualify as performing COVID-19 duty under the relevant Cabinet decision.

administrative petition_allowed Significant COVID-19 duty ex-gratia compensation Cabinet Decision No. 2835 private COVID-19 hospital

UOI v. K. Zachariah & Ors.

16 Mar 2007 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:459-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court set aside the Tribunal's order relying on an overruled Supreme Court precedent and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Central Administrative Tribunal Supreme Court precedent overruling remand

Jasbir Singh Bhalla & Anr v. UOI & Ors

16 Mar 2007 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:258-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 3

The Delhi High Court set aside the Tribunal's promotion-related judgment and remanded the matter for fresh consideration in light of the Supreme Court's overruling of the Rangaiah principle.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant promotion rules Armed Forces Headquarters Stenographers’ Service Rules Departmental Promotion Committee Rangaiah principle

Archana Aggarwal & Anr v. D.D.A.

07 Feb 2007 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:1924

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal directing the DDA to convert the appellants’ leasehold property to freehold within two weeks, rejecting delay tactics based on pending misuse charges.

property appeal_allowed Significant leasehold to freehold conversion Delhi Development Authority misuse charges lease restoration

Govt of NCT of Delhi v. Vikram

13 Oct 2006 · C. Hari Shankar; Anoop Kumar Mendiratta · 2024:DHC:9886-DB

The Delhi High Court held that a departmental clarification equating SAV to B.Ed. validates the respondent’s promotion to PGT despite an earlier committee’s rejection.

administrative appeal_allowed Significant Departmental Promotion Committee Post Graduate Teacher SAV qualification B.Ed equivalence