Mr Avinash Trivedi Mr Rahul Aggarwal, Advs v. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER EDUCA

$~36 & 37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 160/2024 & EX.APPL.(OS) 1313/2025 (U/O XXI Rule 12) MS SUBHAM BUILDERS THROUGH ITS PARTNER MR BIJENDER KUMAR .....Decree Holder Through: Mr Avinash Trivedi & Mr Rahul Aggarwal, Advs. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER EDUCATION SOUTH AND SOUTH EAST DIVISION .....Judgement Debtor Through: Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Panel Counsel(Civil), GNCTD with Mrs. Chandrika Sachdev & Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advs. 37 + OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 161/2024, EX.APPL.(OS) 1309/2025 (U/O XXI Rule 12) & EX.APPL.(OS) 44/2026 (Seeking permission to deposit the balance awarded amount) MS SUBHAM BUILDERS THROUGH ITS PARTNER MR BIJENDER KUMAR SO SH RAM KISHAN .....Decree Holder Through: Mr. Avinash Trivedi and Mr Rahul Aggarwal, Advs. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER EDUCATION SOUTH AND SOUTH EAST DIVISION .....Judgement Debtor Through: Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Ms. Chandrika Sachdev, Advs. Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advs. with Mr. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/01/2026 at 12:20:06 Ajay Kumar, APO/OSD Department of Education Mr. R. Seshadari Section Officer Department of Education Mr. Rajesh Kumar, EE, PWD CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR O R D E R % 19.01.2026 1. This Court takes note of the Order dated 29.10.2025 and in the context of which reads as follows: <1. These are applications filed by the decree holders under order XXI Rule 12 read with Section 151 of CPC seeking attachment of the movable property of the judgment debtor. 2. The present enforcement petitions reveal a dismal picture of noncompliance on the part of the judgment-debtors. In all such petitions, a similar chain of events has occurred. However, for the sake of brevity, the chronology of events in OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 218/2024 is being set out hereinbelow. 3. The chronology of events in OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 218/2024 is that on 26.09.2024, this Court recorded that under the Arbitral Award dated 07.01.2024, as modified on 29.01.2024, a sum of ₹6.85 crores along with post-award interest was due and payable to the decree-holder. Since in the petition filed by the PWD under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, being O.M.P. (COMM.) 394/2024, no stay had been granted, the judgment-debtor was directed to deposit the decretal amount within a period of eight weeks. 4. On 05.08.2025, this Court noted that the period of eight weeks granted on 26.09.2024 had expired on 26.11.2024, and despite the lapse of more than eight months, the decretal amount had not been deposited. The learned counsel for the judgment-debtor submitted that the amount would be deposited shortly. 5. However, this Court proceeded to attach Account No. 32371114065, with a direction to the Branch Manager concerned to remit an amount of ₹7,50,94,698/- to the Registrar General, Delhi High Court, within four weeks. Liberty was granted to the decree-holder to withdraw the said amount upon furnishing This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/01/2026 at 12:20:06 appropriate security, and the petition was accordingly disposed of. 6. On 18.08.2025, an application was filed by the judgment-debtor stating that the said account had been wrongly attached and that another account of the PWD should be attached instead of Account No. 32371114065. This Court observed that the judgment-debtor had not brought the demand draft to Court for deposit with the Registrar General, Delhi High Court, and instead sought the attachment of another account through the said application. 7. Consequently, the Chief Engineer, PWD was directed to explain as to why the judgment-debtor had not complied with the directions of this Court. 8. In compliance, an affidavit was filed by the PWD. In paragraph 4 of the said affidavit, it was stated that on 12.03.2025, the PWD had submitted the matter to the Education Department of the judgment-debtor for approval, and in paragraph 5 it was stated that once such approval was received, the amount would be deposited in Court. 9. On 26.08.2025, based on the said affidavit, notice was issued to the Director, Education Department, GNCTD, to explain why the order dated 18.08.2025 had not been complied with. Thereafter on 12.09.2025, this Court again directed learned counsels, to file the account details of the PWD, Department of Education, and the Government of NCT of Delhi, so that the amounts in question may be attached from the said accounts. 10. In para 17, of the affidavit filed in response to Order dated 12.09.2025 it is stated as under: <17. In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that the matter needs to be vetted by Finance Department, GNCTD, Law Justice Department, GNCTD and Competent Authority for the release of decretal amount.= 11. A perusal of the aforesaid order, affidavits filed by the said departments show that the State Departments have little or scant respect for the orders and the timelines indicated by the Courts. 12. Mr. Rohatgi, learned counsel for the respondent, states that the Director of Education was never a party to the arbitration proceedings. 13. I find no merit in the contention raised. Once the orders were passed, the Education Department was well within its rights to challenge the same and seek their stay or setting aside before the competent forum. However, the Department cannot be permitted to This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/01/2026 at 12:20:06 sit in appeal over the orders passed by this Court and unilaterally decide that such orders are not applicable to it. Additionally, another department of NCT namely PWD who has stated in paragraph 4 of their affidavit filed in response to Order 18.08.2025 that it is the Education Department which is liable to pay the amounts. Para 4 of the said Affidavit reads as under: <4. Further in view of above, a revised preliminary estimate dated 12.03.2025 was submitted to Education Department of Judgment- Debtor for administrative approval and expenditure sanction of competent authority. However, the expenditure sanction is still awaited from competent authority therefore, the direction of deposit could not be complied by Judgment-Debtor.= 14. The affidavit filed on behalf of the Department appears to suggest that, irrespective of the timelines fixed by this Court, compliance with its directions would be deferred until requisite departmental approvals are granted. This, in effect, would mean that the Courts should refrain from prescribing any timelines for compliance of its orders by the State Departments. If such a stand were to be accepted, it would render the enforceability of judicial orders illusory, as their implementation would become contingent upon interdepartmental sanctions and approvals. Such a situation is wholly incomprehensible and cannot be countenanced by me. 15. I am of the view that the Director of Education of the judgment-debtor as well as PWD is in violation of the orders passed by this Court dated 26.09.2024 in OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 218/2024, 29.05.2025 in OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 160/2024 and OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 161/2024 and Contempt of Court proceedings need to be initiated against Engineer-In-Chief and Director of Education of judgment-debtor. 16. They shall file an affidavit as to why the contempt of Court proceedings should not be initiated against them for violating the Orders of 26.09.2024 in OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 218/2024, and 29.05.2025 in OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 160/2024 and OMP (ENF.) (COMM.) 161/2024. 17. List on 19.01.2026.= 2. Pursuant to the said order, another Order dated 12.01.2026 came to be passed by this Court in the following terms: <1. The present application under Section 151 of the Civil This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/01/2026 at 12:20:06 Procedure Code, 1908 read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeks permission to deposit the balance awarded amount along with condonation in depositing the said amount. 2. A perusal of the Order dated 29.10.2025 reflects the anguish of this Court at the repeated and wilful disobedience of its directions by the Applicant, compliance having been secured only upon the threat of contempt proceedings. 3. The filing of the present application does not, in this Courts view, efface the earlier inertia and stubborn disobedience of the concerned officers. 4. Even till date, no affidavit offering a satisfactory explanation has been placed on record. 5. It would be apposite to extract Para 10 of the Application which reads as under: <10. That the Judgment-Debtor submits that there has never been any intention to disobey or undermine the authority of this Hon’ble Court. The delay, though regrettable, is attributable to systemic and procedural constraints inherent in governmental functioning, and not to any willful or contumacious conduct. On the contrary, the present application itself demonstrates the bona fide intent of the Judgment-Debtor to purge the default by immediate compliance.= 6. We are of the considered view that the explanation offered is wholly inadequate and does not justify the manner in which the officials have conducted themselves. 7. The directions contained in paragraphs 15 and 16 of the Order dated 29.10.2025 are reiterated and shall be strictly complied with. The Engineer-in-Charge and the Director of Education shall file their personal affidavits before the next date of hearing. 8. List on 19.01.2026.= 3. Despite opportunities having been granted to the concerned officers of the concerned departments, affidavits of almost similar nature have been filed yet again. 4. This Court is of the view that such repeated conduct of filing affidavits, both in their tone and tenor thereof, is clearly This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/01/2026 at 12:20:06 unsatisfactory. In fact, and as is apparent, the present affidavits are almost a reiteration of the earlier affidavits and the officers are only seeking to contend that non-compliance was occasioned by administrative and procedural constraints. The same only displays the continued recalcitrance of the concerned officials and exacerbates the situation further. It displays the scant regard the officers seem to have for directions passed by this Court. 5. Mr. Dhruv Rohtagi, learned counsel who appears on behalf of the Respondents Authorities submits that he may given another opportunity to ensure that the amounts directed to be deposited are done so within a period of three days from today. 6. He also requests one last opportunity to ensure that better and proper affidavits are filed by the concerned officers within ten days from today, failing which, this Court may be constrained to pass adverse orders. 7. List on 02.02.2026. HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. JANUARY 19, 2026/ v/kr/dj