Delhi High Court
CONT.CAS(C)/1893/2026 of KANISHK SINGH Vs SHRI RAJEEV VERMA & ORS. on 13 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010496322026 + CONT.CAS(C) 1893/2026 KANISHK SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Appearance not given. versus SHRI RAJEEV VERMA & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Urvi Mohan Mr. Aakrit Bhargava Ms.Roshni Agarwal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS.
$~111
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010496322026
+
CONT.CAS(C) 1893/2026
KANISHK SINGH
.....Petitioner
Through:
Appearance not given.
versus
SHRI RAJEEV VERMA & ORS.
.....Respondent
Through:
Ms. Urvi Mohan Mr. Aakrit Bhargava
Ms.Roshni Agarwal, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
%
13.10.2026 CM APPL. 71546/2026 (Seeking Exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. The Application stands disposed of. CONT.CAS(C) 1893/2026
3. A Contempt Petition under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Sections 2(b) and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act has been filed for non-compliance of the Orders dated 29.07.2026 in W.P.(C) No.10465/2026 and 21.09.2026 in W.P.(C). No.13917/2026, whereby the Respondents were directed to decide the Application of the Petitioner for issuance of the Scheduled Caste Certificate, in the light of the Government of India Notification dated 03.09.2019.
4. Learned counsel for the Respondent has appeared on advance Notice and has stated on instructions that the Application details as uploaded by the
Petition was lacking in material particulars. It was stated that in the Application, in answer to the query as to whether any of the paternal blood relation of the Applicant possess Scheduled Caste Certificate, the answer was „No‟. The status of the mother was stated to be “separated”. An objection was whether the divorce has taken place or not, which is not clearly indicated. Thirdly, it was noted that the residential proof, had not been uploaded. Furthermore, the Mother‟s Caste Certificate had not been uploaded and the Divorce Decree had not been uploaded.
5. It is further stated that generally, where a person applies for a Caste Certificate, essentially it is processed on the basis of the Caste Certificate of the father or the mother, but here nothing has been indicated by the Applicant, in his uploaded Application.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that all these particulars had been furnished in the Writ Petition and the learned counsel for the Respondent is telling “LIES” in this regard.
7. It may be noted that it is not for the Respondent to file the Application online for Caste Certificate, nor it is an obligation of the Respondent to pick up all the details from the Writ Petition or to fill in the missing details on their own. It is the obligation of the Petitioner to file an Application with all material particulars. Therefore, the contention of the Counsel for the petitioner that the particulars are available on the judicial record, does not absolve him from any obligation of filing his Application with complete details.
8. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that he would file a complete Application with complete particulars within one week, after which the same shall be processed by the Respondent, in accordance with law, preferably in two weeks.
9. With these directions, the present Contempt Petition is disposed of.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J OCTOBER 13, 2026/va