Delhi High Court

59,406 judgments

Year:

Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi v. The Self Financing Educational Institutions Association

10 Mar 2016 · Chief Justice; V. Kameswar Rao · 2019:DHC:7489-DB

The Delhi High Court held that retrospective fee fixation under the Delhi Professional Colleges Act is impermissible, and the Government cannot rescind a fee notification once accepted and notified for future academic years, except to the extent of invalid retrospective application.

administrative appeal_partially_allowed Significant fee fixation retrospective notification State Fee Regulatory Committee Delhi Professional Colleges or Institutions Act, 2007

Ramakant Dixit v. Security Printing and Minting Corporation of India Limited and Ors.

07 Mar 2016 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2021:DHC:1199
Cites 2 · Cited by 0

The Delhi High Court held that the CVC's advice is advisory and its reconsideration beyond prescribed time limits is permissible, dismissing the petition challenging initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner.

administrative petition_dismissed Significant Central Vigilance Commission disciplinary proceedings reconsideration of advice writ petition

M/S PACIFIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. v. SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

04 Mar 2016 · V. KAMESWAR RAO · 2020:DHC:934

The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner, authorized under a concession agreement with DMRC, has the right to charge parking fees on the property, and SDMC cannot restrain such collection without statutory authority.

administrative petition_allowed Significant Concessionaire Agreement Parking fees Floor Area Ratio Delhi Municipal Corporation Act

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

Vinod Singh Yadav v. M/S Securitans India Pvt Ltd

28 Feb 2016 · Vinod Goel · 2018:DHC:1465

The Delhi High Court held that the Labour Court in Delhi has jurisdiction to adjudicate the industrial dispute as part of the cause of action accrued in Delhi, setting aside the order declining jurisdiction.

labor appeal_allowed Significant Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Labour Court jurisdiction Territorial jurisdiction Cause of action

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

All India Carrom Federation v. Union of India

04 Feb 2016 · V. Kameswar Rao · 2018:DHC:4866

The Delhi High Court examined the validity of All India Carrom Federation elections held in 2015, emphasizing strict compliance with the Sports Code and Ministry oversight to ensure fair and transparent elections.

administrative other Significant National Sports Federation Model Election Guidelines Sports Code 2011 Election validity

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.

Govind Rawat v. Union of India & Ors.

01 Feb 2016 · C. Hari Shankar · 2019:DHC:2334
Cites 0 · Cited by 7

The Delhi High Court dismissed AIIMS's review petition, holding that resignation acceptance conditional on penalty payment is ineffective without such payment.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant resignation acceptance conditional acceptance subject to condition penalty for mid-term discontinuation

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 5

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

S Rajagopal v. Union of India and Ors.

07 Sep 2015 · C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul · 2025:DHC:1794-DB
Cites 1 · Cited by 41

The High Court held that disputes regarding entitlement to Ex-Serviceman status and ESM identity cards for retired armed forces personnel drawing pro-rata pension fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Armed Forces Tribunal, and the writ petition is not maintainable before the High Court.

administrative appeal_dismissed Significant Ex-Serviceman status Armed Forces Tribunal jurisdiction pro-rata pension Kendriya Sainik Board