Facts
The applicants, consisting of 61 retired employees (teachers, principals, and administrative staff) of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS), filed a Contempt Petition alleging non-compliance with orders passed in O.A. No. 4407/2018.
Source reference: p. 1-8During the hearing on April 30, 2026, the respondents informed the Tribunal that the underlying legal issues are currently sub-judice before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Source reference: p. 9Specifically, the Supreme Court has stayed the operation of a related judgment in the case of Bharti Bahuguna Ors. v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Ors. (W.P.(C) No. 3172/2019).
Source reference: p. 9Issues
1. Whether the Contempt Petition should remain pending while the identical legal issue is under a stay order by the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Source reference: p. 9Law Applied
The Tribunal applied the principle of judicial propriety and efficiency, noting that when the "similar issues" are pending consideration and a stay has been granted by a superior court (the Supreme Court), the lower tribunal should not proceed with contempt proceedings.
Source reference: p. 9This aligns with the doctrine that contempt cannot be insisted upon when the operation of the source judgment is stayed by a higher court, as seen in the reference to the stay order in Bharti Bahuguna Ors. v. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Ors.
Source reference: p. 9Reasoning
The Bench, comprising Mr. Manish Garg and Dr. Anand S Khati, observed that the respondents’ counsel established a direct nexus between the present matter and the case pending before the Supreme Court.
Source reference: p. 9Given that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has explicitly granted a stay on the operation of the judgment in the related Bharti Bahuguna case, the Tribunal determined that keeping the present Contempt Petition active would serve "no useful purpose" at this juncture.
Source reference: p. 9The Tribunal balanced this by entertaining the applicants' request for "liberty to revive," ensuring that the applicants' rights are protected once the Supreme Court finalizes the legal position.
Source reference: p. 9Holding
The Tribunal held that the Contempt Petition cannot proceed during the pendency of the Supreme Court stay.
The Petition was closed with liberty granted to the applicants to revive the same in accordance with law, if required in the future.
Source reference: p. 10All notices issued were discharged, and all pending Miscellaneous Applications were disposed of.
Source reference: p. 10Original Court PDF
R K ChopravsSh. Vikas Gupta, Commissioner, Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sanghthan Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in