Stay of underlying order by a superior court warrants closure of contempt proceedings with liberty to revive.

The petitioners (sixteen individuals, led by Ashok Kumar Sharma) filed a Contempt Petition alleging non-compliance with the Tribunal's directions passed in O.A. No. 2017/2019

During the hearing on March 18, 2026, the respondents (Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited) submitted that the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi had stayed the operation of the order passed in the captioned Original Application

Consequently, the petitioners sought liberty to pursue legal recourse in accordance with the law

1. Whether the Contempt Petition can proceed while the operation of the underlying order is stayed by a superior court?

The Tribunal applied the principle of judicial discipline and stay of execution, which dictates that contempt proceedings cannot be sustained or continued when the operation of the judgment/order alleged to have been violated is stayed by a superior court (in this case, the Delhi High Court)

The Tribunal’s decision was based on the "categorical statement" provided by the respondents’ counsel regarding the stay granted by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi

The Tribunal reasoned that since the primary order in O.A. No. 2017/2019 is currently under the shadow of a stay order, the allegation of contempt cannot be adjudicated at this juncture

To balance the interests of the petitioners, the Tribunal granted them liberty to revive the petition at a later stage, depending on the outcome of the proceedings in the High Court or other changes in legal status

The petitioners were granted liberty to revive the petition, if required, in accordance with the law

All pending Miscellaneous Applications were disposed of, and no order was made regarding costs