This application sought revival of proceedings to record UGC's compliance with a Supreme Court judgment regarding arrears release. The court allowed the application and noted the matter was satisfied due to compliance.
The contempt petition is disposed of as having been satisfied; the application for revival is disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~14
Through: Mr. Abhishek Rawat, Adv.
versus
SHAKTIKANTA DAS (SECRETARY) & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mohinder J. S. Rupal, Mr. Hardik Rupal & Ms. Pragati Advs. For R-4. Mr. Anil Soni, CGSC With Mr. Devvrat Yadav, Adv. For UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
CM APPL. 48711/2023
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 18/05/2024 at 11:30:34
Commission (“UGC”) submits that subsequently the Supreme Court by its common Judgment dated 10th May, 2022 has finally decided the issue.
CONT.CAS(C) 3/2017
MINI PUSHKARNA, J
JANUARY 15, 2024/kr
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 18/05/2024 at 11:30:34
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be dismissed given UGC's compliance with the Supreme Court judgment dated 10 May 2022.
Whether the present proceedings require revival to take on record the respondents' compliance.
What is the outcome of the contempt petition in light of satisfaction of the arrears?
N C BAKSHI
SHAKTIKANTA DAS (SECRETARY)
UGC
MINI PUSHKARNA
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
