In a contempt matter, the High Court found no reason to pursue the case as it considered no contempt was committed. The petitioner was permitted to challenge the impugned order separately; otherwise, the case was closed.
Contempt case closed with liberty to challenge the impugned order separately.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 3RD PHALGUNA, 1939
Con.Case(C).No. 115 of 2018 IN WPC. 30470/2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 30470/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 09-11-2017
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER
MUSLIM EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY STANDING COMMITTEE ON MES AIDED COLLEGES, MES CENTRAL OFFICE, IMA HALL ROAD, NADAKAVU, CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY CORRESPONDENT AND CHAIRMAN, P.H.MUHAMMED, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.HAJI PK., HYDROSE, RESIDING AT A1-CHEROOTY NAGAR, PUTHIYARA P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-4.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA
RESPONDENT(S)/3RD RESPONDENT:
SRI. T.A ABDUL MAJEED
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRESENTLY WORKING AS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT -673 635.
BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-02-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
dlk
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
C.O.(C) No. 115 of 2018
Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2018
JUDGMENT
This contempt case is filed by the petitioner complaining
that the directives contained in the judgment dated 9.11.2017 in
its letter and spirit is not carried out by the respondent. In fact
Annexure A3 order dated 31.12.2017 is passed by the
respondent University holding as follows:-
“With reference to the above, I am to inform you that your
application for additional programmes under self-financing
stream cannot be considered, based on the legal opinion
received from the standing Counsel of the University that
seeking affiliation for additional programmes in the self
financing stream by a private college receiving aid from the
Govt and UGC cannot be granted.”
According to the petitioner, the same is not in
C.O.(C) No. 115 of 2018
2
commensurate with the directions issued by this Court in Annexure
A2 judgment. In my considered opinion when an order is passed by
the respondent as is directed, petitioner is to challenge the same. I am of the considered opinion that there is no contempt as such
committed by the respondent. Therefore, I do not find any reason to pursue the contempt case any further.
Leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to challenge Annexure
A3, this contempt case is closed.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE
dlk/22/2/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner committed contempt of court by the University's order refusing affiliation for additional programmes in the self-financing stream contrary to previous directions.
Muslim Educational Society Standing Committee on MES Aided Colleges
Sri. T.A Abdul Majeed
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
