Delhi High Court
CONT.CAS(C)/1678/2026 of SHRI DIPANJAN DAS Vs SH. RAJEEV VERMA, CHIEF SECRETARY, GNCTD & ORS. on 14 September 2026
$~86 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010433152026 + CONT.CAS(C) 1678/2026 & CM APPL. 62178/2026 SHRI DIPANJAN DAS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. D. Moitra, Advocate. (M): 9810083029 Email: debasishmoitra@gmail.com versus SH. RAJEEV VERMA, CHIEF SECRETARY, GNCTD & ORS.
$~86
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
#
CNR No. DLHC010433152026
+
CONT.CAS(C) 1678/2026 & CM APPL. 62178/2026
SHRI DIPANJAN DAS
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr. D. Moitra, Advocate.
(M): 9810083029
Email: debasishmoitra@gmail.com
versus
SH. RAJEEV VERMA, CHIEF SECRETARY, GNCTD &
ORS.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, SC, GNCTD
with Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh and
Ms. Aliza Alam, Mr. Mohnish
Sehrawat and Ms. Ananya Saxena,
Advocates for GNCTD.
(M): 9313964463
Email: avnish@ahlawatassociates.in
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
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
% 14.09.2026 CM APPL. 62178/2026 (For exemption)
1. The present application has been filed seeking exemption from filing certified copies of annexure nos. C-1 to C-13, appended to the captioned petition.
2. Exemption allowed, subject to filing of the same, within a period of four weeks, from today.
3. The application is accordingly disposed of.
CONT.CAS(C) 1678/2026
4. The present petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 08th July, 2026, passed in W.P.(C) 8912/2026, wherein, this Court had directed that the representations already submitted by the petitioner as well as the writ petition, shall be treated as a representation, and the same were to be considered by the respondents. The Court further directed the Competent Authority of the respondents to pass a Speaking Order within a period of six weeks, from the date of the said order.
5. Since a Speaking Order has not been passed by the respondents within the stipulated period in the aforesaid order, the present petition has come to be filed.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents appears on advance notice and submits that a Speaking Order dated 21st August, 2026, has already been passed. She has handed over copy of the said Speaking Order, which is taken on record.
7. Accordingly, the order dated 08th July, 2026, passed in W.P.(C) 8912/2026, stands complied with.
8. At a later stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has put in appearance.
9. He submits that the purported Speaking Order dated 21st August, 2026, passed by the respondents is not a Speaking Order.
10. He further submits that the same has not been passed by the Competent Authority but by a junior officer.
11. If that be the case, in case, the petitioner has any grievance against the aforesaid Speaking Order passed by the respondents, he is at liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law.
12. Noting the above, the present petition is disposed of.
13. Pending application also stands disposed of. MINI PUSHKARNA, J SEPTEMBER 14, 2026 c