Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010163762025 2025:GAU-AS:10074 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2415/2025 PANKAJ MALHOTRA S/O LATE SURENDER KUMAR MALHOTRA, OFFICE AT C BLOCK RAJIV GANDHI BHAWAN, SAFDARJUNG AIRPORT, JOR BAGH, NEW DELHI VERSUS KARUNA RANI ROY W/O. LT. MANORANJAN ROY, VILL. JOGIPARA, VIP, P.O. AND P.S. BORJHAR, PIN-781015, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R DUBEY, MR. A N I HUSSAIN,MS. A B KAYASTHA Advocate for the Respondent : MR P C R MEDHI, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 04.08.2025 Heard Mr. R. Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.C.R. Medhi, learned counsel for the respondent/contemnor. 2. By way of this Interlocutory Application, the applicant is seeking striking out of the name of the respondent/contemnor No. 4 from the array of parties in the accompanying contempt petition. 3. It is the specific case of the applicant that though Sh. Pankaj Malhotra has been impleaded as respondent/contemnor No. 4 in the accompanying contempt proceeding, i.e, Cont.Cas(C) No. 59/2025 against the post of Executive Director (F and A), R.G. Bhawan, Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi-110003, however, it is one Sh. J. Balashekar, who is actually holding the said post of Executive Director (F and A) and Sh. Pankaj Malhotra is the member (Finance). 4. Paragraph No. 4 of the Interlocutory Application reads as hereunder:- “4. That the applicant / respondent / contemnor no. 4 states and submits that in the Writ Petition i. e W.P (C) No.675/2021, the petitioner had arrayed "The Executive Director (F & A) AAI R.G Bhawan, Safdarjung Airport New Delhi-11003" as respondent no. 4 but in the contempt petition, the petitioner has arrayed the applicant herein, who is not the Executive Director (F and A) but he is holding the post of member of the Board of the Airports Authority of India and is designated as Member (Finance). It is further submitted that the applicant as Member (Finance) was not impleaded in the writ petition nor the applicant had dealt with any issue pertaining to the contempt petitioner. Moreover, he had never been served with a copy of the Judgment and order dated 25.04.2023 passed by the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in W.P(C) No. 675/ 2021, the non compliance of which has been alleged in the contempt Page No.# 3/3 petition. The applicant /respondent no 4 has come to know about passing of aforesaid judgment and order dated 25.09.2024 passed by the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in W.P(C) No. 675/ 2021 only after receipt of the copy of the contempt petition.” 5. Reading of the aforesaid, it is apparent that respondent/contemnor No. 4 has been wrongly named. Accordingly, the name of Sh. Pankaj Malhotra is struck off from the array of respondent/contemnors in Cont.Cas(C) No. 59/2025. 6. Accordingly, the Interlocutory Application stands allowed and is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant