Shaileshbhai Shantilal Parekh vs Jatinkumar Harjivandas Soni, In ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1848 Guj

      C/MCA/257/2021                               ORDER DATED: 16/02/2022




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 257 of 2021

         In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10750 of 2016

=============================================
                  SHAILESHBHAI SHANTILAL PAREKH
                                Versus
JATINKUMAR HARJIVANDAS SONI, IN CHARGE REGISTRAR OF SAURASHTRA
                             UNIVERSITY
=============================================
Appearance:
MR ANAND B GOGIA(5849) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR BB GOGIA(5851) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MUSKAN A GOGIA(6624) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.D.M.DEVNANI, AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 4
MR AR THACKER(888) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 2,3
=============================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
       ARAVIND KUMAR
       and
       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI

                         Date : 16/02/2022

                            ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR)

[1] This contempt proceedings have been initiated by

the applicant, who was also the applicant in Special Civil

Application No.10750 of 2016 alleging that the order

dated 18.08.2020 passed in the said Special Civil

Application along with the connected matters has been

violated. On notice being issued, respondents have

appeared and filed their reply affidavit and have stated

C/MCA/257/2021 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2022

that they have taken into consideration the observations

made by this Court in Special Civil Application No.10750 of

2016 and paid the amounts as indicated in paragraphs 3

to 5 of the affidavit dated 11.02.2022 filed by the

Registrar of University. On the short ground that there

was no direction issued to the respondent to either pay

any amount or determine any amount this contempt

proceedings is liable to be dismissed.

[2] In fact, the order which came to be passed in the

Special Civil Application No.10750 of 2016 and connected

matter reads thus:-

"8. Accordingly, petitions are allowed. The order impugned in the petitions are quashed and set aside. As far as SCA No. 10136 of 2016 and SCA No.10750 of 2018 are concerned, since there was an ad-interim relief against recovery and now since the petitions are allowed there shall be no recovery. As far as SCA No.6365 of 2009 is concerned, since the order of the Tribunal in Application No.3 of 2001 dated 12.09.2008 is quashed and set aside, the respondent University is directed to refund the amount which is recovered from the petitioner pursuant to the judgment and order of the Tribunal. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs."

[3] A plain reading of the above order would clearly

indicate that the orders, which were impugned therein has

been quashed and in so far as the present applicant is

C/MCA/257/2021 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2022

concerned, this Court noticed that there was already a

stay operating in favour of the petitioner against the

respondent from recovering any amount from the

petitioner. It is not the case of the petitioner that any

amount has been recovered. Even otherwise subsequently

the payments have been made as indicated in paragraphs

3 to 5 of the affidavit dated 11.02.2022. If there is any

dispute with regard to the same, petitioner would be at

liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings for appropriate

relief.

[4] With these observations, the present contempt

proceedings stands dropped.

(ARAVIND KUMAR, C.J.)

(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J.)

DHARMENDRA KUMAR