Delhi High Court Weekly Round-Up: October 14 To October 20, 2024

Citations 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1130 to 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

NOMINAL INDEX

Emeka Prince Lath vs. State NCT of Delhi 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1130

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS versus PARMILA DEVI 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1131

SMT USHA DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1132

RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL v. CENTRAL INFOMATION COMMISSIONER AND ORS. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1133

SWARANJIT SINGH NARULA SECURITY AGENCY v. NTPC LIMITED 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1134

Hameedullah Akbar@ Faheem Modh Zai vs. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1135

Devasia Thomas & Anr. vs. Government Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1136

Dalmia Family Office Trust & Anr. vs. Getamber Anand & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1137

Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1138

COURTS ON ITS OWN MOTION IN RE: SUICIDE COMMITTED BY SUSHANT ROHILLA, LAW STUDENT OF I.P. UNIVERSITY 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1139

X v. Y 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1140

SANTOSH KUMAR AND ORS. v. STATE THROUGH SHO PS NEW ASHOK NAGAR AND ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1141

STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ANR versus SHUBHAM PAL ANR ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1142

GIRRAJ PRASAD GURJAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1143

ICRI CORPORATES PRIVATE LIMITED v. SHOOGLO NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY OMG NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED) 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1144

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Versus ANAND MOHAN SHARAN & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1145

Amir Malik vs. Commissioner of GST 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1146

ASHA RANI GUPTA versus RAVINDERA MEMORIAL PUBLIC SCHOOL & ANR 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

Notice U/S 50 NDPS Act 'Not Necessary' For Search Of Bag As It Was Separate From Accused's Person: Delhi High Court

Case title: Emeka Prince Lath vs. State NCT of Delhi

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1130

While hearing a bail plea of a man booked for offences under the NDPS Act, the Delhi High Court said that the requirement of Section 50 notice under the NDPS Act would not be "necessary" in respect of the search of a bag which was thrown by the accused in the case, as the bag was separate from the accused's body.

The high court however noted that when the accused's personal search was conducted the provisions of Section 50 had been complied with. For context, Section 50 of the NDPS Act states the conditions under which search of persons shall be conducted.

Anganwadi Workers Can Earn From Other Sources As Recompense From Anganwari Work Is Meagre: Delhi High Court

Case Title: GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS versus PARMILA DEVI

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1131

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain has held that Anganwadi workers can have a source of additional income apart from Anganwari work. The Bench stated that it is not possible for Anganwadi workers to sustain themselves or their families from the salary earned by them as Anganwari workers and having more sources of income won't be unnatural.

Delhi High Court Grants Compassionate Allowance To Widow Of Dismissed Employee

Title: SMT USHA DEVI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1132

A Division Bench Delhi High Court consisting of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Dr. Sudhir Kumar Jain ruled in favour of Usha Devi, directing the Union of India to grant her compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. This decision overturned the rejection of her plea by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), which had previously denied her request following the dismissal of her husband from government service.

Personal Information Of Employees Like Service Records, Copies Of Promotion & Financial Benefits Can't Be Disclosed Under RTI Act: Delhi High Court

Title: RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL v. CENTRAL INFOMATION COMMISSIONER AND ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1133

A single judge bench of the Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Sanjeev Narula, while deciding writ petition held that the personal information of employees like service records, copies of promotion & financial benefits can't be disclosed under the RTI Act.

Delhi High Court Allows Extension Of Arbitrator's Mandate Despite Post-Expiry Filing U/S 29A Of Arbitration Act

Case title: SWARANJIT SINGH NARULA SECURITY AGENCY v. NTPC LIMITED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1134

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has held that a petition filed under Section 29A of the Act is maintainable even if it is filed after the expiry of the arbitrator's mandate.

Further, the court observed that this question is still pending before the Supreme Court due to a conflict of decisions of different High Courts, the view taken by Delhi High Court has not been stayed.

Continuation Of Criminal Proceedings Will Be Exercise In Futility: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Upon Amicable Settlement

Case title: Hameedullah Akbar@ Faheem Modh Zai vs. State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1135

The Delhi High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against an Afghan national for offences including rape and forgery of valuable security on the ground that the accused and the complainant, a US national, have amicably compromised and the complainant no longer wished to pursue the case.

It stated that the continuation of criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility as even the complainant did not support the prosecution's case.

Delhi High Court Directs BSES To Pay Ex-Gratia Sum Of ₹10 Lakhs To Parents Of Boy Who Died Due To Electrocution

Case title: Devasia Thomas & Anr. vs. Government Of NCT Of Delhi & Anr.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1136

The Delhi High Court has awarded an ex-gratia compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs to the parents of an 18-year-old boy who passed away due to electrocution. It directed the BSES Yamuna Power Ltd to pay compensation to the parents despite finding that the negligence on the part of BSES in maintaining the electric lines could not be prima facie established.

Baseless Allegations Against Arbitrators Must Be Dealt With Strictly, Arbitral Tribunals Can Hold Party In Contempt: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Dalmia Family Office Trust & Anr. vs. Getamber Anand & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1137

The Delhi High Court division bench comprising Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Amit Sharma has held that Arbitral Tribunals have the same power as a Civil Court in dealing with contempt against itself as per sections 17(2) and 27(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court held that baseless allegations against Arbitrators must be dealt with strictly. It observed that the integrity of arbitration cannot be made fragile by giving room to unsubstantiated or speculative allegations against arbitrators.

'Prima Facie Contemptuous': Delhi High Court Orders Take Down Of Wikipedia Page On Pending Defamation Suit By ANI

Title: Wikimedia Foundation v. ANI & Ors.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1138

The Delhi High Court has ordered take down of a page on Wikipedia on the pending proceedings about a Rs. 2 crores defamation suit filed by news agency Asian News International (ANI) against the platform.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that adverse comments were made against the single judge on the page which was prima facie contemptuous.

Delhi High Court Seeks BCI's Stand On Attendance Requirements For 5-Year LLB Courses In Suo Moto Case Over Student's Suicide

Title: COURTS ON ITS OWN MOTION IN RE: SUICIDE COMMITTED BY SUSHANT ROHILLA, LAW STUDENT OF I.P. UNIVERSITY

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1139

The Delhi High Court has recently sought stand of the Legal Education Committee of the Bar Council of India (BCI) regarding the attendance requirements for five year LL.B. degree courses.

A division bench comprising of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Amit Sharma asked the BCI's Legal Education Committee to hold a virtual meeting for finalising its position and directed that an affidavit be filed within two weeks.

Orders Passed U/S 12 Of Guardians And Wards Act Appealable U/S 19 Of Family Courts Act: Delhi High Court

Title: X v. Y

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1140

A full bench of Delhi High Court has ruled that the orders passed under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act would be appealable under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act.

The full bench comprising of Justice Rekha Palli, Justice Jasmeet Singh and Justice Amit Bansal was answering a reference in a minor custody case. The question before the full bench was whether an order passed under Section 12 of the GW Act would be appealable under Section 19 of the FC Act?

Delhi High Court Summons Counselling Centre In-Charge For Failing To Translate Contents Of Settlement In Vernacular Language

Title: SANTOSH KUMAR AND ORS. v. STATE THROUGH SHO PS NEW ASHOK NAGAR AND ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1141

The Delhi High Court recently summoned the in-charge of counselling centre, Karkardooma Courts, for failing to translate contents of a settlement agreement to the complainant woman in the vernacular language understood by her.

Justice Chandra Dhari Singh observed that though the official language for court proceedings and documentation is English, the concerned authority is duty bound to translate the contents of such documents to a person not well versed with the language.

'OKEY' Is Informal Usage, Slangs Cannot Be Regarded As “Meaningful English Usage”: Delhi High Court

Case Title: STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION AND ANR versus SHUBHAM PAL ANR ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1142

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices C. Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain was considering an academic issue concerning Combined Graduate Level Examination Tier-II, 2023 conducted by the SSC for recruitment to various civil posts.

Delhi High Court Allows Review Petition, Recalls Direction To Respondents To Appoint Petitioner Due To Low Merit

Case Title: GIRRAJ PRASAD GURJAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1143

A division bench of Delhi High Court comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur has allowed a Review Petition filed by the Respondents seeking review of its order directing the Respondent to recall the appointment of a candidate(writ petitioner).

Review was sought on the ground that the candidate had not made his place in the merit list, however, the Single Judge had directed the Respondents to recall his offer of appointment.

Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Challenging Recalculation Of Arbitral Fees, Upholds Separate Fee Calculation For Claims & Counterclaims

Case Title: ICRI CORPORATES PRIVATE LIMITED v. SHOOGLO NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY OMG NETWORK PRIVATE LIMITED)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1144

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the arbitral tribunal had correctly applied the IVth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in recalculating the fees separately for the claims and counterclaims.

Additionally, the court held that invoking Section 39(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was premature since no award had been made.

'Reasons' To Remit Matter For Fresh Inquiry Need To Be 'Meaningful And Self Speaking', Can't Be Left To Imagination, Delhi High Court

Case Title: UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. Versus ANAND MOHAN SHARAN & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1145

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Hari Shankar and Sudhir Kumar Jain upheld a judgement of the Central Administrative Tribunal stating that the 'reasons' for remitting the matter as is required by Rule 9(1) of the AIS (D & A) Rules need to be meaningful and cannot be left for imagination.

SCN Was 'Gloriously Silent' On Provisions Of GST Act Which Were Allegedly Infringed: Delhi High Court Quashes Order

Case Title: Amir Malik vs. Commissioner of GST

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1146

Finding that the SCN as well as the final order fails to provide any clue with respect to the provision of the statute which was alleged to have been violated or infringed, the Delhi High Court quashes the SCN & the order of cancellation of GST registration.

Approval By DoE Mandatory For Order Of Dismissal Against Teachers In Private Schools, Ex Post Facto Approval Cannot Sustain In Law, Delhi High Court

Case Title: ASHA RANI GUPTA versus RAVINDERA MEMORIAL PUBLIC SCHOOL & ANR

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1147

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justices Hari Shankar and Justices Sudhir Kumar Jain has recently set aside a teacher's Order of Dismissal from service observing that the ex post facto approval of the Directorate of education in dismissing a teacher from service granted cannot sustain in law as mandated under Section 8(2) of the DSE Act and Rule 120(2) of the DSE Rules.