Delhi High Court

35,876 judgments

Year:

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 22

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

M/S KESPL-ESWAR-ABCPL JV v. M/S KNR-JKM JV

31 Mar 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:6807
Cites 1 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, holding that the existence of an arbitration agreement is to be prima facie examined by the court, while substantive disputes are to be decided by the arbitral tribunal.

arbitration appeal_allowed Significant Section 11(6) Arbitration Act arbitration agreement prima facie jurisdiction sub-contract agreement

State Transport Authority and Anr v. Pushpinder Singh Malik and Ors

22 Mar 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Manoj Jain · 2024:DHC:9626-DB

The Delhi High Court dismissed a delayed writ petition challenging a CAT interim order restraining disengagement of temporary ex-servicemen employees, holding that delay and abuse of process warranted dismissal.

administrative petition_dismissed Article 226 Central Administrative Tribunal writ petition interim order

Union of India v. Rambir Singh

17 Mar 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:87
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The High Court upheld the illegality of a stigmatic termination without prior opportunity and refused belated additional evidence, dismissing the Union of India's second appeal for reinstatement of a CRPF constable.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant termination of service temporary government servant principles of natural justice Order XLI Rule 27 CPC

F HOFFMANN-LA ROCHE LTD & OTHERS v. DRUGS CONTROLLER GENERAL OF INDIA & OTHERS

03 Mar 2016 · Amit Bansal
Cites 0 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court allowed plaintiffs' applications for discovery of regulatory and clinical trial documents from defendants in bio-similar drug suits, holding such documents relevant and necessary for adjudication despite confidentiality claims.

civil appeal_allowed Significant discovery of documents bio-similar drugs Drug Controller General of India Order XI Rules 12 and 14 CPC

Arvind Kaushik v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

26 Feb 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:485

The Delhi High Court directed a school to admit an EWS student and provide mandatory educational benefits, enforcing the student's right to free and compulsory education.

constitutional petition_allowed Economically Weaker Section Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 admission DOE allotment

Union of India v. Suresh Kumar

18 Feb 2016 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:600-DB
Cites 2 · Cited by 5

The Delhi High Court upheld the CAT's decision quashing recovery of excess MACP payments from a retired employee without prior notice, reaffirming Supreme Court precedents protecting employees from retrospective pay reductions absent fraud or knowledge.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant excess payment recovery MACP pay fixation show cause notice principles of natural justice

Vipin Malik & Anr. v. PACL India Ltd. & Ors.

02 Feb 2016 · Prathiba M. Singh · 2024:DHC:2515

The Delhi High Court dismissed the execution petition against PACL India Ltd., holding that the Supreme Court-appointed Lodha Committee's exclusive mandate precludes release of funds for rent arrears, granting liberty to seek alternative remedies.

civil petition_dismissed Significant execution petition Order XXI CPC Lodha Committee PACL India Ltd.

Emerson Process Management Power and Water Solutions Inc v. Controller of Patents

21 Dec 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2023:DHC:8871

The Delhi High Court set aside the rejection of software-related patent applications based on obsolete grounds and remanded them for fresh consideration under current Patent Office guidelines.

intellectual_property appeal_allowed Patents Act, 1970 patent application computer software patent novelty

Smt Jodhian (Since Deceased Through LRs) & Ors. v. Methodist Church in India

16 Dec 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:334

The Delhi High Court dismissed the second appeal upholding the respondent's ownership and rejecting the appellants' plea of adverse possession and bar of suit under Order II Rule 2 CPC.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant adverse possession Order II Rule 2 CPC concurrent findings of fact mandatory injunction

Bhim Rao Yadav and Anr v. Chairman-cum-Managing Director and Ors

16 Dec 2015 · C. Hari Shankar; Girish Kathpalia · 2024:DHC:8803-DB

The Delhi High Court set aside the Tribunal's non-adjudicatory orders and remanded the petitioners' overtime allowance claim for fresh consideration on merits.

labor appeal_allowed overtime allowance Delhi Transport Corporation Tribunal jurisdiction remand

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS v. UDAL SINGH

30 Oct 2015 · C. HARI SHANKAR; TUSHAR RAO GEDELA · 2024:DHC:8855-DB

The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of disciplinary proceedings against a teacher on the ground that the chargesheet and punishment were issued by authorities lacking jurisdiction under the CCS (CCA) Rules after his elevation to Group 'B' status.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant disciplinary proceedings competent authority Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 Group B officers

M/S DRS LOGISTICS (P) LTD & ANR. v. GOOGLE INDIA PVT LTD & ORS.

27 Oct 2015 · V. KAMESWAR RAO · 2021:DHC:3482

The Delhi High Court held that use of registered trademarks as backend keywords in Google's advertising platform does not constitute trademark infringement or passing off, and Google is entitled to intermediary protection under the IT Act.

civil appeal_dismissed Significant trademark infringement keywords meta-tags Google AdWords

IACUITY TELCO SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. v. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.

27 Oct 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7081
Cites 1 · Cited by 2

The Delhi High Court held that the plea of limitation cannot be decided at the stage of appointment of arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and directed reference of disputes to arbitration under DIAC.

civil appeal_allowed Significant Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Section 11(5) Limitation Appointment of arbitrator

M/S ABL BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD & ORS v. M/S TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT BOARD & ANR

23 Oct 2015 · C. Hari Shankar · 2024:DHC:7277

The Delhi High Court set aside an arbitral award passed by an arbitrator unilaterally appointed by one party, holding such appointment invalid even before the 2015 amendment to the Arbitration Act.

civil petition_allowed Significant arbitration unilateral appointment arbitral award nullity ab initio

Ashok Kumar Kharya v. State of NCT of Delhi

09 Sep 2015 · Swarana Kanta Sharma · 2023:DHC:5795
Cites 1 · Cited by 1

The Delhi High Court upheld the validity of a supplementary chargesheet filed without prior court permission and dismissed the petition seeking quashing of the summoning order against the petitioner accused of criminal breach of trust and cheating in a housing society land fraud case.

criminal petition_dismissed Significant supplementary chargesheet Section 173(8) CrPC fair investigation Article 21 Constitution