Sevti Devi Memorial Senior ... vs Sanjay Goel
2018 Latest Caselaw 5429 Del

`#80

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


                                              Judgment delivered on: 10.09.2018

CONT.CAS(C) 681/2018

SEVTI DEVI MEMORIAL SENIOR
SECONDARY VIDYA MANDIR                                    ..... Petitioner




                              versus


SANJAY GOEL                                               ..... Respondent


Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner  : Mr. A.K. Pandey and Mr. Hem Kumar, Advocates
For the Respondent  : Mr. Ramesh Singh, Standing Counsel, GNCTD with Mr. Chirayu Jain,
                      Advocate

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

                                  JUDGMENT

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J (ORAL)

1. The present contempt petition under Sections 11 and 12 of the

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 prays as follows:-

"a) Initiate the contempt of court proceedings against the contemnor/respondent for willful and deliberate disobedience and non-compliance of order dated

04.05.2018 passed by this Hon'ble High Court in Writ Petition (C) No.3803 of 2018 in case titled as Sevti Devi Memorial Senior Secondary Vidya Mandir Versus Directorate of Education.

b) Direct the contemnor/respondent to forthwith comply with the order dated 04.05.2018 passed by this Hon'ble Court in Writ Petition (C) No.3803 of 2018 in case titled as Sevti Devi Memorial Senior Secondary Education versus Directorate of Education and grant necessary permission to the petitioner school for a period of five years to run the science stream at 10+2 level at petitioner school."

2. In compliance with the directions issued by this Court, vide order

dated 04.05.2018, the Directorate of Education, vide its communication

dated 07.09.2018, has required the petitioner to produce a documentary

proof in relation to the salary and other benefits, including bonus, LTC and

leave encashment, disbursed by them to their staff, in terms of the provisions

of Section 10(1) of Delhi School Education Act and Rules, 1973.

3. Mr. A.K. Pandey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioner states that, in compliance thereto, they have furnished requisite

information to the Directorate of Education today.

4. In view of the foregoing, Mr. Ramesh Singh, learned Standing

Counsel appearing on behalf of Government of National Capital Territory of

Delhi states that, further action, in accordance with law, shall be taken within

two weeks from today, under intimation to the petitioner.

5. Directed accordingly.

6. No further directions are called for in the present petition.

7. With the above directions, the petition is disposed of accordingly.

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL (JUDGE)

SEPTEMBER 10, 2018 dn