Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 116 (UTT)

Pradeep Singh Aswal v. Om Prakash

2016-03-08

U.C.DHYANI

body2016
JUDGMENT : U.C. Dhyani, J. By means of present civil contempt petition, the petitioner seeks that the respondents / opposite parties be punished for committing willful disobedience of the judgment and order dated 28.10.2015, passed by this Court, in WPMS no. 2677 of 2015, titled as Vandana Godiyal and another vs. State of Uttarakhand and others. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court towards judgment and order dated 28.10.2015, passed by this Court, in WPMS no. 2677 of 2015 (Annexure 1 to the contempt petition). It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that other similarly situated persons have been granted benefit of aforesaid order, whereas the petitioner has been left out and he is yet to be granted the benefit of the aforesaid judgment and order. The State has already filed a compliance affidavit (Annexure nos. 3 and 4 to the contempt petition) in respect of other similarly situated persons. 3. Instead of issuing contempt notices to the respondents / opposite parties, the operative portion of the judgment and order dated 28.10.2015, passed earlier by this Court, is being reproduced here-in-below to remind the opposite parties that a duty has been cast upon them to do something as per the order dated 28.10.2015, which has not been done as yet. The same reads as under. “As a consequence thereof, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 27.08.2015, rendered in Writ Petition no. 1434 of 2015 (M/S) with the direction that the petitioners shall file fresh applications for registration with Para-Medical Council within two weeks from today annexing therewith all the requisite documents. Having received such applications, the Council shall forward the same to the State Government for approval / relaxation of the State Government within next two weeks, whereupon State Government shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law within next ten days. It goes without saying that if petitioners are found having valid degree in their favour issued by the appropriate University, then registration should not be refused on hyper-technical grounds.” 4. Civil contempt petition is disposed of at the admission stage by directing the petitioner to remind the respondents / opposite parties of the order dated 28.10.2015 and the respondents / opposite parties, in turn, are expected to do the needful at the earliest, in accordance with law, within a reasonable time. 5. Civil contempt petition is disposed of at the admission stage by directing the petitioner to remind the respondents / opposite parties of the order dated 28.10.2015 and the respondents / opposite parties, in turn, are expected to do the needful at the earliest, in accordance with law, within a reasonable time. 5. If the respondents / opposite parties fail to do so, it shall be presumed that they have nothing to say in the matter and they will be liable for appropriate action under the Contempt of Courts Act. 6. The petitioner shall serve the copy of this order upon the opposite parties, within a week.