Lakhmi Chand v. Amulya Patnaik, Commissioner Of Police

$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 38/2018 LAKHMI CHAND ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. N.S. Dalal, Advocate versus AMULYA PATNAIK, COMMISSIONER OF POLICE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Ankur Chibber for R-2, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

O R D E R

% 19.01.2018 1) Issue Notice. Mr. Ankur Chibber, accepts notice on behalf of Respondent no. 2. The learned counsel for the respondent says that he does not wish to file a reply in view of the instructions that he has obtained in the matter.

2) This petition for contempt has been preferred by the petitioner on the ground that there is a violation of the stay order dated 20.9.2017 granted by my predecessor. The assertion made, is that, despite the injunction deduction in the month of December, 2017 was made from the salary of the petitioner.

2.1) Learned counsel for the respondent informs me that this was done, inadvertently, and that, a sum of Rs.12,700/- was deducted in December, 2017which has been reversed on 8.1.2017.

3) Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the

respondent, according to me this contempt petition need not proceed further. The deduction made, inadvertently, from the salary has been reversed. The grievance of the petitioner has been addressed. 4) Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J JANUARY 19, 2018/Nk