Harpreet Singh v. Vice Chancellor Panjab University And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.8391 of 2022 Date of Decision: 29.04.2022 HARPREET SINGH ......Petitioner Vs VICE CHANCELLOR PANJAB UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH Present:Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral) Petitioner has preferred this writ petition for the issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ for setting aside the order dated 28.02.2022 passed by the Advocate General, Punjab. Perusal of pleadings of CWP No.18768 of 2019, would show that the petitioner has taken the ground of fabrication of letter and tampering thereof. The petitioner has also pleaded fraud with the Court and also sought initiation of contempt proceedings. This is so pleaded in the additional affidavit attached with writ petition.

At the time of decision of the writ petition on

 07.12.2021, no such grounds were pressed before the Coordinate Bench. The writ petition was disposed of as infructuous on the basis of statement made by learned counsel for the respondents that the said writ petition had become infructuous in view of allotment of House No.54, Type-III, Ground Floor, Panjab University Campus, Sector 25, Chandigarh to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner did not dispute the aforesaid fact and admitted that the house in question has been allotted to the petitioner though certain maintenance work are to be carried out. The Co-ordinate Bench was pleased to dispose of the writ petition as infructuous with liberty to the petitioner to approach respondent-authorities for carrying out the necessary maintenance works within the stipulated period.

Evidently, no ground for initiation of contempt proceedings was pressed and proposed. The Advocate General, Punjab vide the impugned order has opined that the petitioner did not raise any such issue in respect of the fact for which the opinion has been sought for initiation of contempt proceedings, therefore, the petitioner has failed to established any tampering of evidence or other ground for initiating criminal contempt proceedings and thus the requirements of Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 are not satisfied. Having perused the pleadings made in CWP No.

 of 2019 and the order 07.12.2021 passed therein, I find that though ground was taken in the writ petition, but the said ground was never pressed before the Co-ordinate Bench. In view of facts and circumstances of the case, no interference is called for in the impugned order dated 28.02.2022 passed by the Advocate General, Punjab. This writ petition is dismissed.

(RAJ MOHAN SINGH) April 29, 2022 JUDGE Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No