Ramphal vs Union Of India & Ors
2020 Latest Caselaw 1906 Del

$~5

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                  Judgment delivered on: 01.06.2020

+     CONT.CAS(C) 268/2020
RAMPHAL                                              ..... Petitioner

                          versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Ms. Geeta Verma, Advocate.

For the Respondent: Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr. Abhigyan
                    Siddhant, Advocate for R-1.
                    Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Advocate for R-2 & 3.
                    Mr. Anjum Javed, ASC with Mr. Faran Ahmed, Advocate
                    for R-4.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                             JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner has filed the subject contempt petition contending that respondents have failed to comply with the directions contained in order dated 11.12.2019. Order dated 11.12.2019 had directed the Respondents 1 to 4 to expeditiously consider the representation of the petitioner and take appropriate action thereon.

3. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, learned counsel appearing for respondent

Cont.Cas(C) 268/2020 Page 1 Nos.2 & 3 submits that the representation of the petitioner was disposed of by a speaking order dated 15.01.2020 and the letter was addressed to learned counsel for the petitioner. Copy of the communication dated 15.01.2020 has been filed through email. Same is taken on record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that said letter was never received by the petitioner or by her. Copy of the communication dated 15.01.2020 has been forwarded to learned counsel for the petitioner by email by learned counsel for the Respondents 2 and 3.

5. Further, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 submits that the CEO has also approved filing of a police complaint under Section 47 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016 and the department would accordingly file the complaint with the police authorities.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the disposal of the representation and the assurance that a police complaint would be filed under Section 47 of the Aadhaar Act, 2016, she does not wish to press the present petition.

7. The petition is accordingly dismissed as not pressed.

8. Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsel for the Parties through email.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

JUNE 01, 2020/rk

Cont.Cas(C) 268/2020                                             Page 2