MANAV RACHNA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY Vs. JITENDRA CHOUDHARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against order of learned Single Judge, granting interim stay and also initiating,suo motu con tempt proceedings -against Col. (Retd.) V.K. Gaur, Principal Director of the appellant, a deemed University.

(2.) The respondent filed a writ petition, challenging cancellation of his admission to Bachelor of Journalism and Mass Communication for the year 2009-10 on the ground that he failed to furnish character certificate from the last attended institution, which institution, according to the writ petitioner, was also under the control of the appellant. In the writ petition, the respondent pleaded that he was granted admission based on EPSI National Admission Test, 2009 and he paid the requisite fee. He started attending classes from 27.7.2009. However, on 4.8.2009, he was not allowed to continue the classes. He received letter dated 11.8.2009, cancelling his admission. Aggrieved thereby, the writ petition was filed on 15.9.2009. On 16.9.2009, while issuing notice, the Court directed that the respondent be allowed to continue with the course.

(3.) The respondent filed an application on 20.11.2009, stating that the appellant did not allow the respondent to join classes in compliance of order dated 16.9.2009. He was first told that legal advice was being sought. Thereafter, a false complaint was filed against the respondent under Section 107/ 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a view to restrain him from entering the premises of the University in violation of order of this Court. He received letter dated 14.11.2009 to the effect that since this Court had not disposed of application of the appellant within two weeks, interim order dated 16.9.2009 stood vacated under Article 226(3) of the Constitution. The respondent sought stay of the said letter. The said application came up for hearing on 23.11.2009 and while issuing notice to the appellant, operation of order, Annexure P-14, was stayed. It was also observed that there appeared to be wilful disobedience of the order of the Court, for which, Suo motu contempt proceedings were initiated. The matter is listed for hearing on 8.12.2009.