IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1944
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1388 OF 2022
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 19521/2022 DATED 17.06.2022
PETITIONER:
NIJILA DAS C.M, AGED 33 YEARS
W/O DILEEP P, PALATHINGAL HOUSE
OTTAPALAM P.O, PALAKKAD-679103
BY ADVS.
MUHAMMED YASIL
K.I.SAGEER
RESPONDENTS:
1 PROF. (DR.) SABU THOMAS
AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER
VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY
PRIYADARSINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM-686560.
2 PROF. (DR.) PRAKASH KUMAR B
AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER
REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY
PRIYADARSINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM-686560.
SRI SURIN GEORGE IPE-SC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 27.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
COC 1388/22
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that, in spite of the directions in the judgment dated 17.06.2022, the respondent has not issued any order.
2. However, Sri.Surin George Ipe - learned counsel for the respondent, submitted that the afore allegations are untrue and that an order, dated 23.07.2022, has already been issued by the University; though finding against the petitioner. He thus prayed that this contempt case be closed.
3. I have examined the order stated to have been issued by the University dated 23.07.2022, a copy of which has been handed over across the Bar by Sri.Surin George Ipe. When one reads the said order, it is evident that the University merely says that the qualification of the petitioner cannot be accepted, but without citing any reason whatsoever. Though some justification is sought to be offered by Sri.Surin George Ipe, the law is well settled that an order has to be justified on the basis of its contents and not on the strength of pleadings to be made in a COC 1388/22 3 Court once it is issued.
4. Presumably being aware of the mind of this Court as afore, Sri.Surin George Ipe submitted that the respondents will reconsider the matter and issue an appropriate order, adverting to the contentions of the petitioner, if required, after hearing her afresh.
5. I am certain that the afore suggestion of Sri.Surin George Ipe is the best available to both sides at this time.
Resultantly, I close this Contempt Case recording the submissions of Sri.Surin George Ipe that the order dated 23.07.2022 issued by the respondent shall be withdrawn; with a consequential direction to the said Authority to complete the exercise as ordered in the judgment, after hearing the petitioner again; thus leading to an appropriate order on or before 03.08.2022, for which purpose, she shall remain present before the Registrar at 11 a.m. on 30.07.2022.
The Registry is directed to maintain a copy of the order dated 23.07.2022 as part of the Judge's Papers of this case.
Needless to say, I leave full liberty to the petitioner to COC 1388/22 4 approach this Court again with a fresh COC, if the afore directions are also not complied with.
Sd/-
RR DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
COC 1388/22
5
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1388/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure-A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
17.06.2022 IN WP(C) NO.19521/2022
Annexure-A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER
DATED 23.06.2022 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT