Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Anjanli Institute Of Management ... vs Prabhat Ranjan, Registrar, Dr. ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 May, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts has been filed on the allegation of willful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 17.10.2011 passed in Writ Petition No. 57067 of 2011.
I have heard Sri K. R. Sirohi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Rajeev Trivedi, for the applicant and Sri Shailendra appearing for the opposite party.
The facts are that the applicant's institution run by Dr. R. N. Gupta Technical Education Society under the self financing scheme is affiliated with Dr. Bheem Rao Ambedkar University, Agra and also recognized by the National Council for Teachers Training for running B. P. Ed. course. The recognition was granted to the institution on 18.02.2003 for running the said course with an annual intake of 50 students for the academic session 2009-10. Executive Council of Dr. Bheem Rao Ambedkar University passed a resolution dated 28.02.2009 authorizing all the affiliating colleges, including the applicant's institution, to take admission in B. P. Ed. course at their own level. An advertisement was issued on 08.03.2009 in Hindi Daily Newspaper 'Dainik Jagaran' by the applicant's institution inviting applications from eligible candidates. A merit list was prepared and accordingly 50 students were given admission in B. P. Ed. Course for the academic session 2009-10. It is alleged on behalf of the applicant that the said students pursued their studies in the institution and examination forms of all the students along with requisite fees were deposited with the University on 25.09.2010 which was accepted without any objection. University published the examination schedule on 04.11.2010 which was subsequently cancelled. The applicant's and other institutions challenged the same by filing Writ Petition no. 2267 of 2011 before the Lucknow Bench of this Court. On the strength of the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the University in the said writ petition that University is ready to hold the examination provided the students, who have been admitted by the applicant-institution, are eligible. The said writ petition was disposed of on 16.04.2011 with the direction that the University shall carry out the aforesaid undertaking made by its counsel before the Court. University again send a communication dated 18.05.2011 to the applicant's institution for holding of B. P. Ed. examination for the academic session 2009-10 and schedule for the same was also notified. However, Admit Cards were not issued to the students studying in the applicant's institution. Subsequently, the Registrar of the University issued a communication to the affiliated colleges notifying the details of the students studying in respective institutions who were found eligible after verification permitting them to appear in the examination. Finding that none of the students of the applicant's institution were included in the said list, the applicant again approached this Court by filing writ petition no. 57067 of 2011. The said writ petition was disposed of vide judgment and order dated 17.10.2011 with the following observations :
"Consequently, in such a situation, petitioners are directed to produce entire documents by special messenger to the University concern within three weeks and thereafter, on the basis of the same, documents so produced, University concern is directed to take reasoned decision in regard to holding of examination of incumbent as already directed by this court on the earlier occasion, preferably within six weeks thereafter."
In pursuance of the aforesaid direction, the applicant claims to have submitted entire documents through special messenger along with certified copy of the order of this Court to the University on 24.10.2011. However, when University failed to take any decision within the time specified by this Court, the applicant filed instant contempt petition.
On being noticed, an affidavit of Deputy Registrar of the University was filed on 19.03.2012 alleging that in compliance of the direction of this Court, the matter was placed before the examination committee in its meeting dated 25.02.2012 which decided to hold B. P. Ed. examination for the session 2009-10 as per standard fixed by the National Council for Teacher Education. The examination committee also decided that so far as the applicant's institution is concerned since no one is qualified as such the students of the said institution cannot be permitted to appear in the examination.
The matter was heard on 06.04.2012. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court finding that the order passed by the opposite party in compliance of the direction issued by this Court neither makes any reference to documents supplied by the applicant nor it contains any reason for declaring the students of the institution ineligible to appear in the examination according to N.C.T.E. guidelines dated 29.08.2009 even though the admission process of the students was completed before enforcement of the guidelines cannot be said to be actual compliance of the order in letter and spirit. However, considering the entire facts and circumstances, the Court granted one more opportunity to the opposite party to reconsider the matter and pass a fresh order in accordance with the direction issued by the writ court.
An affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite party stating therein that the matter has been reconsidered as directed by this Court and a fresh reasoned order dated 14.05.2012 has been passed and since again it was found that the students were ineligible as such no examination is liable to be conducted for them.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that again the students of the applicant's institution have been held to be ineligible on the ground that they do not conform to the guidelines prescribed by the NCTE in August, 2009 even though the admission process of the students was completed prior to the enforcement of the said guidelines. It is further submitted that the Court vide order dated 09.04.2012 found that the said reason cannot constitute a ground to hold the students ineligible still for the same reason, the claim for appearing in the examination has been rejected and thus, the order passed afresh is again not in accordance with the direction issued by the writ court and rejecting the claim for the same reason second time amounts to willful disobedience constituting a contempt.
In reply, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party has submitted that on the basis of the documents made available and information supplied by the Principal of the institution since it was found that the fees from the students was accepted in cash and it was never deposited in Bank as such it was not possible to verify the authenticity of the admission said to have been granted to the students and, therefore, they were held to be ineligible. It has further been submitted that other reason to reject the claim was that the advertisement issued by the institution inviting application was itself not in accordance with the NCTE norms in as much as the same mentioned direct admission through norms require that admission is to be made on the basis of merit in the written examination. He further pointed out that there is nothing on record to indicate that any examination was ever held and the admissions were made according to merit list.
I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The order dated 14.05.2012 clearly records that the Principal of the Institution vide letter dated 15.12.2011 informed that in all 50 students were given admission prior to 31.08.2009 in accordance with the advertisement published on 08.03.2009 and fees of Rs.27,450/- per student was charged from them. It has further been mentioned in the letter that the Bank account of the society in the Axix Bank, Agra was seized by the Income-Tax Department as such fees realized could not be deposited in the Bank. Order further records that advertisement inviiting applications by direct admission without any examination or merit list is in violation of NCTE norms and guidelines. Order also records that since the fee has been accepted in cash as such it was not possible to verify the genuineness of admission of the students and in case the account was seized, the University ought to have been informed this fact and appropriate direction ought to have been obtained in that regard. In the absence of any such steps taken by the applicant's institution, the entire process of admission becomes doubtful.
Though, the order also records that NCTE in August, 2009 laid down the guidelines which have been violated but neither of the parties have been brought on record the NCTE guidelines which was enforced prior to August, 2009. Thus, it is not possible for this Court to test whether the advertisement was issued in accordance with NCTE guidelines or was in violation of the same as found by the opposite party in the order dated 14.05.2012.
Further more, merits of the case is normally not to be tested in contempt jurisdiction. No doubt, the Contempt Court can test the order in order to satisfy itself whether there is actual compliance of the order in letter and spirit and it is not merely en eye-wash to avoid the contempt proceedings but in any case the legality and validity of the order on merits is not to be tested in these proceedings.
From a perusal of the order dated 14.05.2012, the Court finds that the same has been passed after considering the documents and record made available by the applicant and contains reasons for arriving at the conclusion. The direction of the writ court was to take a reasoned decision on the basis of the documents produced by the applicant and the same appears to have been complied by the opposite party.
Since the order passed by the writ court has been complied by the opposite party, the Court does not intended to proceed with the contempt any further.
The contempt notices are discharged and the application stands consigned to record.
Order Date :- 31.05.2012 Dcs
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Anjanli Institute Of Management ... vs Prabhat Ranjan, Registrar, Dr. ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 May, 2012
Judges
  • Krishna Murari