Dismissed

Rahul Anand v. Gari Arathun the Secry. C.I.S.C. Examination

Allahabad HC24 Apr 2019CAPL/816/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt application, the applicant alleged non-compliance with Court orders directing the respondent Council to address his grievances. The respondent argued lack of jurisdiction over Class-V internal school exams. The Court found no contempt. Notice was discharged and the application dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Officers instructed to take no further action; notices in this application were discharged.

Rahul Anand Vs Gari Arathun the Secry. C.I.S.C… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 816 of 2014 Applicant :- Rahul Anand Opposite Party :- Gari Arathun The Secry. C.I.S.C. Examination Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- S.C.,Prateek J Nagar

¶3

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶4

No one appears for the applicant in the revised call.

¶5

By order dated 24.5.2013 passed in Writ C No.29564 of 2013 filed by the applicant, the Court directed as under:

¶6

"In view of the aforesaid, writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a representation ventilating all his grievances before respondent no.2 within two weeks from today alongwith certified copy of this order. On such representation being made, respondent no.2 shall consider and decide the same by means of a reasoned speaking order, after affording opportunity to the institution concerned, preferably within eight weeks thereafter."

¶7

A certified copy of the aforesaid order was submitted for compliance before the opposite party on 30.5.2013. Once the opposite party did not take any decision on his representation then the applicant had preferred Contempt Application (Civil) No.4284 of 2013, which was disposed of on 12.9.2013 with following observations:-

¶8

"From a perusal of the averments made in the contempt application, prima facie, a case for contempt appears to have been made out. But, the Court in its magnanimity allows one more opportunity to the opposite party to comply with the order of the writ Court.

¶9

Considering the facts, contempt application stands disposed of with the direction to the opposite party to take appropriate decision in the matter of the applicant in accordance with the direction contained in the order dated 24.05.2013 passed by this Court on Writ Petition No. 29564 of 2013 within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him positively, failing which, he may be liable to be summoned and prosecuted after framing of charges."

¶10

Thereafter the present contempt application has been filed alleging that the orders of this Court dated 24.5.2013 and 12.9.2013 have not been complied with by the opposite party.

¶11

Shri J. Nagar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Pratik Nagar, Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party has placed reliance on the averments contained in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 of the affidavit of compliance dated 6.5.2014 and submitted that so far as Class-V Examination

¶12

is concerned, the same is internal examination of the school and the Council for Indian School Certificate Examination has no role in the said examination. Accordingly, the Council for Indian School Certificate Examination could not look into the grievance of the applicant. In response of the aforesaid order of this Court dated 24.5.2013 necessary information was sent to the applicant stating that the Council has nothing to do in the matter and for redressal of his grievance he can approach to the institution in question.

¶13

In the facts and circumstances this Court is of the opinion that no contempt is made out against the opposite party. Consequently nothing further survives and the application is disposed of. Notices are discharged. Order Date :- 24.4.2019 RKP

Rahul Anand v. Gari Arathun the Secry. C.I.S.C. Examination

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Anand v. Gari Arathun the Secry. C.I.S.C. Examination

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Khairsalli Vs Smt. Anwari Begum and 8 Ors.

Lal Ji Vs Dr. Ujjawal Kumar, City Commissioner

Smt. Chandrawati Vs Bhanu Chandra Goswami, Vice Chairman and 2 Others

Satya Pal Vs Om Narayan Singh D.M. and 2 Ors.

Dhani Ram Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Mukesh Dutt and 19 Others Vs Sri Vinay Kumar Dist. Basic Shiksha Adhikari Saharanpur