Avinash Kumar vs Akhilesh Kumar Dixit

$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
rd
% Date of Decision: 03 September, 2026
# CNR No. DLHC010386642026
+ CONT.CAS(C) 1494/2026
AVINASH KUMAR .....Petitioner
Through: Dr. Vikas Kumar, Adv. (Through
VC)
versus

AKHILESH KUMAR DIXIT .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Kaustubh Sinha, Ms. Surbhi
Mehta and Mr. Hari Krishan Sangwa,
Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL):

1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging wilful
th
disobedience of the judgment dated 27 April, 2026, passed by this Court in
W.P.(C) 2439/2020 .

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that directions as
given in paragraph 65(g) of the aforesaid judgment have not been complied
with by the respondent. The said paragraph is reproduced as under:
“xxx xxx xxx

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM SHARMA
Signing Date:06.09.2026
16:22:53
Page 1 of 5

xxx xxx xxx”

3. In response, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has drawn
the attention of this Court to paragraph 65 (d) of the said judgment, wherein,
it had been directed as follows:
“xxx xxx xxx

xxx xxx xxx”
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent has further drawn the
attention of this Court to Annexure C-7, attached to the present petition,
st
which is an intimation dated 21 May, 2026, issued by the respondent to the
petitioner, intimating him the decision to initiate disciplinary proceedings
against him in terms of the liberty as granted by the Court in the said
judgment, and in exercise of the powers under the Conduct, Discipline and
Appeal Rules as adopted by the respondent.
5. Thus, learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the
decision to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner herein was
taken in terms of the liberty so granted by the Court vide the judgment dated
th
27 April, 2026.
6. Attention of this Court has also been drawn to the Memorandum of
th
Charges (charge sheet) dated 08 June, 2026, annexed as Annexure C-9, to
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM SHARMA
Signing Date:06.09.2026
16:22:53
Page 2 of 5

the present petition, issued against the petitioner under Rule 25(3) of the
Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules by the respondent.
7. This Court is informed that despite issuance of the said charge sheet,
the petitioner has till date not filed any reply to the said charge sheet.
8. In this regard, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has drawn
th
the attention of this Court to the letter dated 30 June, 2026, issued by the
respondent. The said letter is reproduced as under:
“

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM SHARMA
Signing Date:06.09.2026
16:22:53
Page 3 of 5

”
9. Thus, it is submitted that the action, in terms of the directions passed
by this Court, has been taken.
10. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM SHARMA
Signing Date:06.09.2026
16:22:53
Page 4 of 5

the issue with regard to the payment of back wages in terms of paragraph 65
th
(g) of the judgment dated 27 April, 2026, has still not been considered.
11. However, this Court notes that the directions in paragraph 65 (g) of
the said judgment were conditional, and were to be followed, in case, the
respondent did not issue any charge sheet and did not take a decision for
taking any disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner.
12. Since, it has come to the fore that the respondent has already taken a
decision to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, and in fact
th
a charge sheet dated 08 June, 2026, has already been issued to the
petitioner, there is no occasion for this Court to hold the respondent in
contempt, in any manner whatsoever.
13. No merit is found in the present petition, the same is accordingly,
dismissed.

MINI PUSHKARNA, J
SEPTEMBER 3, 2026/KR




Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:HARIOM SHARMA
Signing Date:06.09.2026
16:22:53
Page 5 of 5