Delhi High Court
W.P.(C)/5269/2023 of SH. ANIL SHARMA Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. on 9 October 2026
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010763272023 + W.P.(C) 5269/2023 SH. ANIL SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Varun Dhingra, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vikrant Nilesh Goyal, Mr. Inderpreet Singh & Mr. Kunal Dixit, Adv. for R-1. Ms.
$~21
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CNR No. DLHC010763272023
+
W.P.(C) 5269/2023
SH. ANIL SHARMA
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr. Varun Dhingra, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mr. Vikrant Nilesh Goyal, Mr.
Inderpreet Singh & Mr. Kunal Dixit, Adv.
for R-1.
Ms. Anushree Narain, SSC and Mr. Apurv
Yadav, Adv. for R-2 to R-4.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHARAT PARASHAR
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
%
09.10.2026
1. The Petitioner seeks directions to the Respondents for the release of 20% of the collected tax as reward. The Petitioner claims that based on information provided by him, the Respondent/Department has been able to effect certain recoveries, and therefore, he is entitled to 20% of the recovered amount as a reward in terms of Circular No. 20/2015 dated 31.07.2015 (Guidelines for Grant of Reward to Informers and Government Servants, 2015).
2. Per Contra, learned counsel representing the Respondents submits that the Petitioner provided information with respect to the following two companies, namely, (i) M/s Avinash EM Projects Pvt. Ltd. and (ii) M/s TJAPL Consortium, and no recovery has been made This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/10/2026 at 10:36:15
in respect of these two assessees.
3. It is evident that highly disputed questions of fact are involved in the present Writ Petition, hence, the Petitioner, if so advised, may avail alternative remedy.
4. At this stage, learned counsel representing the Petitioner submits that the period during which the present Writ Petition has remained pending before this Court should be excluded from the period of limitation for pursuing the alternative remedy.
5. While Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 makes a provision to this effect, however, the Petitioner is required to file an application before the appropriate Court for this purpose.
6. Hence, the Petition is disposed of while relegating him to an alternative remedy.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J
BHARAT PARASHAR, J OCTOBER 9, 2026/RW/MN
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/10/2026 at 10:36:15