Kerala High Court
Nijila Das C.M vs Prof. (Dr.) Sabu Thomas on 27 July, 2022
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
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
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
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
