Md Taukir Alam v. Prof (Dr) Renu Vig And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 01.05.2026 Md. Taukir Alam

...Petitioner(s)

Vs.

Dr. Renu Vig, Vice Chancellor, Panjab University & Ors

...Respondent(s)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Sarthak Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Akshay Kumar Goel, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

Mr. Jasbir Singh Mor, Advocate for respondent No.3.

*** NIDHI GUPTA, J.

Present Contempt Petition has been filed alleging violation of the order dated 23.03.2026 (Annexure P1) passed by this Court in CWP-6324-2026 wherein it was directed as follows:- "1. In the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 13.02.2026 (Annexure P-10) whereby, the services of the petitioner have been discontinued with immediate effect.

2. The contention raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the impugned order vide which the service of the petitioner has been discontinued, was passed without giving any notice or opportunity of hearing, as such, the impugned order

dated 13.02.2026 (Annexure P-10) is bad in law and is liable to be set-aside.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. A.K.Goel, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 and Mr. Virender Gill, Advocate for Mr. Jasbir Mor, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.4.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 submits that the University has taken a decision to withdraw the impugned order dated 13.02.2026 (Annexure P-10) with liberty to pass a fresh order after hearing the petitioner in accordance with law.

6. In view of the statement of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No.1 to 3, the present writ petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous with liberty to respondents No.1 to 3, as prayed for.

7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly."

2.

Mr. Akshay Kumar Goel, Advocate appears on behalf of respondents No.1 & 2 and files Memorandum of Appearance, which is taken on record.

3.

Mr. Jasbir Singh Mor, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.3; and files Power of Attorney, which is taken on record. 4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that despite the above-said order, although the order dated 13.2.2026 has been withdrawn, however, the petitioner has not been reinstated till date.

5.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents No.1 and 2 controverts the submissions of the petitioner and submits that first and foremost, there is no direction to reinstate the petitioner. Further, it was the own statement of the respondent-University to withdraw the impugned order; whereafter fresh order is to be passed after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is pointed out that in compliance of the Writ Court order dated 23.03.2026, a Committee has been constituted by the University to give personal hearing to the petitioner. Accordingly, vide letter dated 28.04.2026, the petitioner was asked to appear before the Committee on 30.04.2026. However, the petitioner has failed to appear. It is further submitted that the petitioner has impleaded the Chairperson of the Department by name as respondent No.

3 in the present Contempt Petition. It is submitted that vide the said notice dated 28.04.2026, even the said Chairperson had been directed to be present before the Committee. However, as he was on leave, he could not appear. It is contended that therefore, the compliance of the Writ Court has been duly made; and it is the petitioner who has not appeared before the Committee constituted by the University for personal hearing. 6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute receipt of letter dated 28.04.2026; and also does not dispute that the petitioner has not appeared before the said Committee for personal hearing. Furthermore, Writ Court order dated 23.03.2026 does not contain any direction remotely to the effect to reinstate the petitioner.

7.

Present Contempt Petition accordingly stands dismissed. 8.

Rules stand discharged.

9.

Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. (Nidhi Gupta) 01.05.2026 Judge Sunena Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No