Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
UDAY UMESH LALIT, VINEET SARAN, JJ.
Ashok Kumar And Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Depinder Singh Dhesi And Ors. – Respondents
Inherent Jurisdiction Contempt Petition (C) Nos.408-409 of 2019 In Civil Appeal Nos.17869-17870 of 2017
Decided on : 13-08-2019
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Section 12 – Contempt of Court – In terms of judgment, candidates who, on the strength of such Degrees awarded through Distance Education Mode, had attained a particular level in their career or were enjoying certain benefits as on the date of Judgment and if they pass examination, those benefits would stand restored – If candidates could clear examination in first attempt itself, there would not even be any break in continuous enjoyment of those benefits or facilities – Idea was, candidates should not stand deprived of status that they were enjoying as on day of Judgment provided candidates could prove their worth and ability – But if, concerned candidates had not attained any particular status as on date when Judgment was passed, width of directions was not to confer any additional advantage which was not even enjoyed as on the date – It was not the idea to hold candidates to be entitled to certain additional benefits which candidates were, as a matter of fact, not even enjoying on the date of judgment – If degrees stood restored in terms of directions in Judgment and Order, candidates would certainly be eligible to such entitlements as are available in accordance with law, but restoration would only be of those benefits, which they were enjoying as on date of Judgment – Intent was to restore status quo ante and not to confer any additional advantage by the Judgment and the Order – If there was serious infirmity in Degrees so obtained by candidates, matter ought to be sorted out either through representation or through properly instituted challenge in that behalf – If promotion was not granted and was not being enjoyed as on day when judgment was passed, there was no violation of any direction issued by this Court – Representations made by Contempt Petitioner claimed conferral of certain status and benefits which they were not enjoying earlier – If there be any grievance on that front, entitlement needs to be established in proceedings other than a Contempt Petition – No violation on part of alleged contemnors – Contempt Petitions dismissed. (Paras 10, 11, 13 and 14)
Facts of the Case:
These Contempt Petitions filed by nine Petitioners submit that alleged Contemnors have wilfully and deliberately violated Judgment dated 03.11.20171 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal Nos.17869-17870 of 2017 and other connected matters and clarificatory Order dated 22.01.20182 passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Application Nos.1795-1796 of 2017 arising from aforesaid Civil Appeals.
Findings of Court:
Serious objection has been raised on behalf of Department that concerned candidates had enrolled themselves in courses leading to Degrees in Engineering through Distance Education Mode without express permission of the Department and/or Department did not recognise Degrees in Engineering awarded through Distance Education Mode or that the concerned candidates were not granted any study leave to pursue such courses. If Degrees were so obtained in violation of the norms and parameters laid down by concerned Department, the matter assumes completely different complexion.
Result : Contempt Petitions dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Uday Umesh Lalit, J.
1. These Contempt Petitions filed by nine Petitioners submit inter alia that the alleged Contemnors have wilfully and deliberately violated the Judgment dated 03.11.2017 [(2018) 1 SCC 468 - Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Limited vs. Rabi Sankar Patro and others] passed by this Court in Civil Appeal Nos.17869-17870 of 2017 and other connected matters (“the Judgment”, for short) and clarificatory Order dated 22.01.2018 [(2018) 2 SCC 298 - Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Limited vs. Rabi Sankar Patro and others] passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Application Nos.1795-1796 of 2017 arising from aforesaid Civil Appeals (“the Order”, for short). In the submission of the Contempt Petitioners the following directions issued by this Court in the Judgment stand violated:-
“58. AICTE is directed to devise within one month from the date of this judgment modalities to conduct appropriate test(s) both in written examination as well as in practicals for the students concerned admitted during the academic sessions 2001-2005 covering all the subjects concerned. It is entirely left to the discretion of AICTE to come out with such modalities as it may think appropriate and the tests in that behalf shall be conducted in the National Institutes of Technology in the respective States wherever the students are located. The choice may be given to the students to appear at the examination which ideally should be conducted during May-June 2018 or on such dates as AICTE may determine. Not more than two chances be given to the students concerned and if they do not pass the test(s) their degrees shall stand recalled and cancelled. If a particular student does not wish to appear in the test(s), the entire money deposited by such student towards tuition and other charges shall be refunded to that student by the deemed to be university concerned within a month of the exercise of such option. The students be given time till 15-1-2018 to exercise such option. The entire expenditure for conducting the test(s) in respect of students who wish to undergo test(s) shall be recovered from the deemed to be universities concerned by 31-3-2018. If they clear the test(s) within the stipulated time, all the advantages or benefits shall be restored to the candidates concerned. We make it clear at the cost of repetition that if the candidates concerned do not clear the test(s) within the time stipulated or choose not to appear at the test(s), their degrees in Engineering through distance education shall stand recalled and cancelled. It goes without saying that any promotion or advancement in career on the basis of such degree shall also stand withdrawn, however, any monetary benefits or advantages in that behalf shall not be recovered from them.
66.6. If the students clear the test(s) within the stipulated time, all the advantages/benefits shall be restored to them and their degrees will stand revived fully.”
It is also submitted that the directions issued above were reiterated in following terms in the Order:-
“[A] All such candidates, who wish to appear at the forthcoming test to be conducted by AICTE in May-June 2018 and who exercise option to appear at the test in terms of the judgment, can retain the degrees in question and all the advantages flowing therefrom till one month after the declaration of the result of such test or till 31.07.2018 whichever is earlier.
[B] This facility is given as one-time exception so that those who have the ability and can pass the test in the first attempt itself, should not be put to inconvenience. If the candidates pass in such first attempt, they would be entitled to retain all the advantages. … …”
2. According to the Contempt Petitioners:-
(i) They had enrolled themselves in courses leading to Degrees in Engineering through Distance Education Mode during the period 2001-2005.
(ii) In terms of the Judgment, the Petitioners appeared in the test held by AICTE [All India Council for Technical Education] on
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
