Citations 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 323 to 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 345
NOMINAL INDEX
PREM SHEELA KUMARI v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 323
VISHWAJYOTI v. VIRENDER KUMAR SARDANA & other connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 324
The New India Assurance Company Ltd v. M/S Kapoor Diesels Garage Pvt Ltd 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 325
International Visa Services Pvt Ltd Formerly Known As Ivs Lanka Pvt Ltd v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 326
Ajit Kumar Singh Through Smt. Poonam Singh Wife And Pairokar v. UoI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 327
MR. NIDISH GOPALKRISHNAN NAIR v. X & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 328
UNION OF INDIA & ORS v. PADMA JAISWAL IAS (AGMUT:2003) & Other Connected Matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 329
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. SK 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 330
ANIL KUMAR TIWARI ANIRUDHACHARYA v. JOHN DOE ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 331
ANUSHKAA ARORA & ORS v. BCD 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 332
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 333
HINDU SHAKTI DAL & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 334
ANJU TANWAR v. LAWYERS CHAMBERS ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE & ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 335
POOJA AS GUARDIAN OF BABY DEVANSHI JAISAWAR v. AADHARSHILA VIDYAPEETH & ANR 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 336
SANDEEP @ KALA @ KALE @ SONU @ SINOTHIA v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 337
Union of India & Ors. v. Naresh Kumar Gupta 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 338
ITGOA & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 339
HAJI MOHD. ALTAF v. STATE & other connected matters 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 340
COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 341
MOHANLAL VISWANATHAN NAIR v. JOHN DOE/ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 342
AJIT KUMAR GOLA v. STATE (GNCTD) AND ORS 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 343
UOI & Ors. Vs B.N. Chaubey & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 344
Debasis Das Gupta & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 345
Title: PREM SHEELA KUMARI v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 323
The Delhi High Court has set aside the Delhi Government's decision denying ex-gratia compensation to the kin of a government school Vice Principal who succumbed to COVID-19 during the second wave.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav allowed the plea filed by the widow of late Dr. Raja Ram Singh and directed the authorities to release ₹Rs. 1 crore compensation under the Delhi Government's COVID relief scheme within six weeks.
Title: VISHWAJYOTI v. VIRENDER KUMAR SARDANA & other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 324
The Delhi High Court has held that a recognised private school cannot be treated as “closed in law” merely because it stopped functioning without obtaining prior approval from the Directorate of Education (DoE), and that such unilateral cessation does not extinguish employees' salary and service rights.
Driving Licence Not Fake Merely Because It Was Not Converted To Smart Card: Delhi High Court
Case title: The New India Assurance Company Ltd v. M/S Kapoor Diesels Garage Pvt Ltd
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 325
The Delhi High Court has held that a driving licence cannot be treated as fake merely because it was in a booklet form and had not been converted into a smart card.
Case title: International Visa Services Pvt Ltd Formerly Known As Ivs Lanka Pvt Ltd v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 326
The Delhi High Court has upheld the disqualification of a bidder from a tender process for outsourcing consular, passport and visa (CPV) services in Sri Lanka, holding that the bidder failed to demonstrate the requisite independent contractual experience as mandated under the tender conditions.
Writ Petition Not Maintainable Before Final Order In Court Martial Process: Delhi High Court
Case title: Ajit Kumar Singh Through Smt. Poonam Singh Wife And Pairokar v. UoI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 327
The Delhi High Court has held that a writ petition challenging disciplinary and court martial proceedings is not maintainable before the passing of a final order.
Title: MR. NIDISH GOPALKRISHNAN NAIR v. X & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 328
The Delhi High Court pulled up various media platforms including a journalist and actress Richa Chadha for their social media posts labelling a man a “molester” over allegations of sexual harassment arising out of an in-flight incident.
Justice Vikas Mahajan said that the narratives set by the media houses and digital platforms clearly breached the contours of the FIR, and that the publications did not merely report the allegations in the FIR but they prematurely adjudicate the matter.
Title: UNION OF INDIA & ORS v. PADMA JAISWAL IAS (AGMUT:2003) & Other Connected Matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 329
The Delhi High Court held that the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), acting as a delegatee of the Joint Cadre Authority (JCA), is legally competent to initiate disciplinary proceedings and impose penalty upon IAS officers borne on the AGMUT (Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Mizoram and Union Territories) cadre.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. SK
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 330
The Delhi High Court recently charges of criminal contempt against a woman advocate for allegedly making scandalous allegations against a judicial officer, both in court and through a social media post on LinkedIn.
Title: ANIL KUMAR TIWARI ANIRUDHACHARYA v. JOHN DOE ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 331
The Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of spiritual preacher Aniruddhacharya, restraining unauthorised use of his persona through AI-generated content, deepfakes and meme-based material across digital platforms.
Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the john doe order while hearing a suit filed by the preacher, who alleged large-scale misuse of his identity, voice, likeness and teachings by various defendants, including unknown entities.
Title: ANUSHKAA ARORA & ORS v. BCD
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 332
The Delhi High Court clarified that the results of Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) elections 2026, shall be declared only after the reconciliation of votes and ballots is concluded.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 333
The Delhi High Court directed the Delhi Police to continue and regularly review the security arrangements put in place in all the district courts in the national capital in consultation with the respective Principal District & Sessions Judges.
A full bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya, Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre closed a suo motu case initiated over an incident where a lawyer was allegedly beaten up by opposing counsel and other individuals inside a Tis Hazari court courtroom on February 07.
Title: HINDU SHAKTI DAL & ANR v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 334
The Delhi High Court ordered immediate take down and removal of a controversial song sung by singers Honey Singh and Badshah from 2000s titled “Volume 1” which was released under the name of “Mafia Mundeer” group.
Associate Of Lawyer Who Was Allotted Chamber Cannot Claim Vested Right To Use It : Delhi High Court
Title: ANJU TANWAR v. LAWYERS CHAMBERS ALLOTMENT COMMITTEE & ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 335
The Delhi High Court has observed that an advocate using a chamber merely as an associate of the original allottee does not acquire any vested right over the said premises being “mere permissive user.”
Title: POOJA AS GUARDIAN OF BABY DEVANSHI JAISAWAR v. AADHARSHILA VIDYAPEETH & ANR
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 336
The Delhi High Court has held that the right to education does not translate to the right to select a particular school of choice once an academic year ends, in the absence of any interim protection.
Title: SANDEEP @ KALA @ KALE @ SONU @ SINOTHIA v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 337
The Delhi High Court has observed that bail conditions cannot extend to invasion of privacy of the family members of an accused or a convict.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani set aside conditions that required police to monitor and collect personal data of wife of an accused during his interim bail.
June 30 Retirement No Bar To July 1 Annual Increment- Delhi High Court
Case Name : Union of India & Ors. v. Naresh Kumar Gupta
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 338
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that a government employee retiring on 30 June is entitled to increment due on 1 July, as the increment is earned for the completed year of service preceding retirement and cannot be denied merely because it becomes payable after retirement.
Case Name : ITGOA & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 339
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that pay parity cannot be claimed solely on basis of historical parity, common recruitment, or similar designation and overlap in functional duties, when the Pay Commission has maintained a distinction between different service cadres i.e. Secretariat and non-Secretariat.
Title: HAJI MOHD. ALTAF v. STATE & other connected matters
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 340
The Delhi High Court has upheld conviction of a lawyer and a cop for extortion and falsely implicating a man, now deceased, in a false gang rape case who was later on beaten up and tortured in police custody.
Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha said that a strong message must be sent to the people occupying positions like a lawyer or a police officer that Courts would not treat such crimes lightly or turn a blind eye to such blatant misuse of their position and authority.
Title: COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION v. STATE AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 341
The Delhi High Court has held that the absence of identifiable child victims or conclusive proof of their age cannot be a ground to discharge accused persons under POCSO Act in cases involving child sexual abuse material (CSEM).
Title: MOHANLAL VISWANATHAN NAIR v. JOHN DOE/ASHOK KUMAR AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 342
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order protecting the personality rights of veteran Malayalam actor Mohanlal.
Justice Jyoti Singh restrained multiple entities, including unknown entities, from unauthorized commercial exploitation of his personality attributes, including through AI-generated content.
Legal Research, Understanding Impugned Order No Ground To Condone Delay: Delhi High Court
Title: AJIT KUMAR GOLA v. STATE (GNCTD) AND ORS
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 343
The Delhi High Court has held that conducting legal research or understanding the impugned order cannot be a ground for condoning the delay.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that if such a ground were to be accepted as a sufficient explanation, it would render the law of limitation and the principles of delay and laches largely otiose.
Combatised BSF Person Retire At 57, Can't Claim Civilian Retirement Age Of 60 - Delhi High Court
Case Name : UOI & Ors. Vs B.N. Chaubey & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 344
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan held that a re-employed ex-serviceman appointed to a combatised post in the Border Security Force, who enjoys the benefits of that combatised cadre, is governed by the BSF's statutory superannuation age of 57 years and not by the 60-year retirement age applicable to civilian posts.
CPF Option Exercised Can't Be Reversed To Claim Pension Under CCS Rules: Delhi HC
Title: Debasis Das Gupta & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Del) 345
A Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Narula held that an employee who has exercised an option to remain under the CPF scheme cannot later claim pension benefits under the CCS Pension Rules, as deemed conversion applies only where no option was exercised.