$~66 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010370252026 + CONT.CAS(C) 1432/2026, CM APPL. 53236/2026 (Exemption) & CM APPL. 53237/2026 (for directions) COL TAHIR MUSTAFA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shashank Garg, Senior Advocate versus PROF ASGAR ALI OFFICIATING VICE CHANCELLOR & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shailendra Slaria, Mr. Naresh Kumar, Ms. S. Mohanti, Mr. Siddhant Katyal, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 12.08.2026 1. The Petitioner was serving on deputation with the Respondent University. He was, however, prematurely terminated and repatriated to his parent organisation vide Office Order dated 3rd August, 2026. Aggrieved thereby, he approached this Court by way of W.P.(C) 10988/2026. 2. In the said proceedings, this Court, vide order dated 04th August, 2026, having formed a prima facie view that the Petitioner had made out a case for interim protection, stayed the operation of the impugned Office Order dated 03rd August, 2026. 3. The pleadings in the said writ petition are yet to be completed and the Court is yet to adjudicate upon the merits of the challenge to the impugned 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 14/08/2026 at 11:28:46 Office Order dated 03rd August, 2026. 4. The present contempt proceedings have been initiated alleging non- compliance with the aforesaid order dated 04th August, 2026. 5. The Court has heard Mr. Shashank Garg, Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, as well as Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Senior Counsel appearing for the University. 6. From the submissions advanced by Senior Counsel for the parties, it emerges that the Petitioner’s grievance principally concerns the Show Cause Notice dated 06th August, 2026, whereby the Petitioner has been called upon to explain the issuance of Office Order No. JH/RO/ICOR/2026/62 dated 05th August, 2026 concerning the routing of official files and adherence to the prescribed administrative procedure. The said Office Order was issued by the Petitioner in the context of the Office Order dated 05th August, 2026 issued by the Assistant Registrar (Establishment) with the approval of the Vice Chancellor, whereby, inter alia, certain administrative arrangements were made, including directions for specified categories of files to be placed directly before the Vice Chancellor. 7. The Petitioner has also raised a grievance in respect of Office Order D.No. Estab/LD/2026/1081 dated 05th August, 2026, which, inter alia, proceeded on the basis that the Petitioner had already been repatriated to his parent organisation and that any order issued by him was “null and void”. 8. Insofar as Office Order D.No. Estab/LD/2026/1081 dated 05th August, 2026 is concerned, the grievance does not survive. Ms. Malvika Trivedi, Senior Counsel for the University, states that the reference therein to the Petitioner having been repatriated was incorrect, particularly in view of the order dated 04th August, 2026 passed by this Court staying the operation of 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 14/08/2026 at 11:28:46 the Office Order dated 03rd August, 2026. She states that, upon noticing the inadvertent error on their part, the said Office Order dated 05th August, 2026 has accordingly been withdrawn. 9. The surviving controversy, therefore, principally concerns the Show Cause Notice dated 06th August, 2026. The said notice was issued in relation to the Office Order dated 05th August, 2026 issued by the Petitioner and, as is evident from its contents, also refers to the issue of the Petitioner’s repatriation being placed before and considered by the Executive Council. 10. Since the aforesaid controversy has its genesis in the subject matter which is already under consideration in W.P.(C) 10988/2026, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the respective contentions, on the suggestion of the Court, the parties have agreed that the status quo with regard to the Petitioner’s repatriation shall be maintained. The Respondents shall accordingly issue appropriate orders clarifying the position. It is, however, clarified that such arrangement shall remain subject to the outcome of W.P.(C) 10988/2026. 11. It is further clarified that nothing contained in this order shall preclude the Respondents from proceeding with the forthcoming meeting of the Executive Council. However, the issues arising from the Show Cause Notice dated 06th August, 2026 and the aforesaid Office Orders shall not be deliberated upon in the said meeting. The Executive Council shall be at liberty to consider any other agenda item, including the issue relating to the Office Order dated 03rd August, 2026, in accordance with law. 12. The rights and contentions of the parties with regard to the outcome of any such deliberations of the Executive Council are left open. 13. The contempt proceedings are accordingly closed and the present 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 14/08/2026 at 11:28:46 petition, along with the pending applications, stands disposed of. SANJEEV NARULA, J AUGUST 12, 2026/ab 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 14/08/2026 at 11:28:46