Harendra Pal Singh & ORS. v. Director General Csir And Secretary Dsir Dr Mrs N Kalaiselvi & ORS.
$~90 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CONT.CAS(C) 2009/2024 HARENDRA PAL SINGH & ORS.
.....Petitioners Through:
Mr. Skanda Sekhar and Mr.
Shivam Kaushik, Advs versus DIRECTOR GENERAL CSIR AND SECRETARY DSIR DR MRS N KALAISELVI & ORS.
.....Respondents Through:
Naginder Benipal SPC for UOI with Ankit Siwach, Udit Vaghela and Arjun Baliyn Adv Mr. Santosh Hegde Sr Adv, Mr. V. S. R.
Krishna and Mr. Mangesh Naik, advs
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 21.05.2026 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
1.
Mr. Sekhar, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submits that though OMs have been issued, making payments to the petitioners in terms of the orders passed by the Tribunal and the order passed by this Court on 28 April 2026, they incorporate the requirement of an undertaking by the petitioners to return the amounts in the case of adverse order in the writ petitions along with interest. He submits that the respondents could not have incorporated a requirement of payment of interest when there was no such permission granted by the Tribunal CONT.CAS(C) 2009/2024 KUMAR 17:29:30
or by this Court.
2.
Mr. Hedge, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents undertakes, for the present, not to press the covenant requiring payment of interest on the amounts which have been disbursed by the impugned orders, in the event of an adverse order in the writ petitions, but reserves his right to move the Court for permission to incorporate such a clause.
3.
Reserving the right as aforesaid, in view of the statement made by Mr. Hedge, there is no purpose in continuing with this contempt petition.
4.
The contempt petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 5.
However, liberty would remain reserved with the petitioner to seek appropriate remedies in case they are aggrieved by the amounts disbursed.
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.
MAY 21, 2026/yg CONT.CAS(C) 2009/2024 KUMAR 17:29:30