Puneet Bansal And ANR v. State Of Delhi And ANR

$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4815/2016 PUNEET BANSAL ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Vikas Nagwan, Advocate.

versus STATE OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr.Uday Chauhan with Ms.Sunita Bansal, Advocates for R-1.

Mr.Kamal Gupta, Advocate for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

O R D E R

% 25.05.2016 Present writ petition has been seeking a direction to respondent no.1-Director of Education to take action on the complaint dated 28th march 2016 regarding the alleged illegal and unlawful activities in respondent no. 2-School.

Learned counsel for respondent no.2-School, who appears on advance notice, strongly refutes the averments in the writ petition. He states that the petitioner has set-up a totally different case in the present writ petition than what had been mentioned by the petitioner in the contemporaneous correspondence.

Since the petitioner's complaint is still pending adjudication before Director of Education, this Court disposes of the present writ petition with a direction to respondent no.1-Director of Education to decide the petitioner's complaint as expeditiously as possible after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the petitioner as well as

respondent no.2-School.

This Court, however, clarifies that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the controversy. The rights and contentions of all the parties are left open.

Order dasti.

MANMOHAN, J MAY 25, 2016 KA