Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2025 DAILYLAW 39816 (DEL)

ANIL KOHLI v. SH RAJEEV KUMAR AND ANR

CONT.CAS(C)/808/2025 · 2025-05-20

Anish Dayal

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~94 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 808/2025 ANIL KOHLI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shanker Raju, Mr. Nilansh Gaurr, Advs. versus SH RAJEEV KUMAR AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yashpal R., Mr. Devender Singh, Advs. for R-1 along with Mr. K.S.L. Ganesh, D.D. (Admin) CCRT/R-1. Mr. Ruchir Mishrra, Mr. Sanjiv Kr. Saxena, Mr. Mukesh Kr. Tiwari, Ms. Poonam Shukla, Ms. Reba Jena Mishra with Mr. Ramreek Mishra, Advs. for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL O R D E R % 20.05.2025 1. This petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 16th July 2024 passed in W.P.(C) 6867/2018. Relevant paragraphs are extracted as under: 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 01/07/2025 at 01:39:04 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 01/07/2025 at 01:39:04 2. Counsel for respondent appears on advance notice and states that indeed there has been a delay, but the same has been necessitated due to circumstances beyond their control. 3. Firstly, petitioner is a ‘Group-A Officer’ and the inquiry will have to be conducted by an officer senior to him. The only officer senior is Director, who is on an additional charge. Secondly, out of 86 sanctioned posts in the Centre for Cultural Resources and Training (CCRT)/respondent, only 43 are currently filled, and there is an acute shortage of staff, due to which they are unable to proceed with expedition. Thirdly, they are in the process of filing an application for extension of time with the Writ Court citing these issues. 4. In these circumstances, counsel for respondent no.1 states that they will complete the inquiry within 4-5 months. 5. Taking this undertaking of respondent no.1 into account, the petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to revive it in case, for any reason, the inquiry is still not completed in the timespan which has been indicated. 6. Needless to state, this will be subject to any orders which may be passed on the extension application by the Writ Court. 7. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J MAY 20, 2025/ak/tk Click here to check corrigendum, if any 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 01/07/2025 at 01:39:04