Ramesh v. Dr.Krishan Kant Gupta Retistrar Mdu Rohtak
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP-2299-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.11.2025 Ramesh ......Petitioner Vs.
Dr. Krishan Kant Gupta and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Present:
Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Amit Rao, Advocate, for respondent No.1.
Mr. Ram Karan Sharma, DAG, Haryana, for respondent No.2.
**** SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (Oral) 1.
The present contempt petition has been filed for deliberate and intentional disobedience of the order dated 16.01.2025 passed by this Court in CWP-253-2025.
2.
This Court had passed the following orders in CWP-253-2025, vide its order dated 16.01.2025:- "4.
Ms. Tanushree Gupta, DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents/State. On asking of the Court, Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, appears on
-2behalf of respondent nos. 3 & 4 and submits that the pending representation, dated 14.11.2024, will be decided by the third respondent/Registrar, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, by passing a speaking/reasoned order thereupon within a period of three months, keeping in view the law laid down in Dr. Subhash Chander case (supra).
5.
In view of the statement made, learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the petition being disposed of in terms thereof.
6.
Ordered accordingly.
7.
In case the order is not passed within the stipulated period, the officer concerned shall pay costs of 50,000 ₹ to the petitioner."
2.
In compliance of the order dated 16.01.2025 passed by this Court in CWP-253-2025, short reply by way of affidavit dated 24.06.2025 of Dr. Krishan Kant, Registrar, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana, along with Annexures R-1/1 to R-1/7, has been filed on behalf of respondent No.1 before the Registry. The relevant portion of the said reply is reproduced as under:- "6.
That it is also important to mention here that despite repeated reminders in the matter to the Director Higher Education, Haryana, Panchkula, the reply has been received from Director Higher Education on 15.05.2025 in response to this office letter dated 14.05.2025 whereas the speaking orders were to be
-3passed by the University upto 15.04.2025 and 16.04.2025 in respect of Dr. Ramesh, Athletic Coach and Sh. Kishan Singh, Hockey Coach respectively. The Director Higher Education, Haryana has requested to supply the compliance report. However when no response has been received from the State Government, and in compliance of the Hon'ble High Court order dated 16.01.2025 the University vide office order dated 20.05.2025 extended the benefits to the petitioner also on the analogy of Dr. Subhash Chander's case subject to final approval of the State Government."
3.
Today, learned counsel for respondent No.1 has produced in Court a copy of the speaking order dated 26.08.2025 passed by the Deputy Registrar (Estt. N.T.), O/o Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak. The same is taken on record. A copy of the said speaking order has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioners. 4.
In view of the above, order dated 16.01.2025 passed by this Court in CWP-253-2025 has been complied with, therefore, the present contempt is purged and rule stands discharged. 5.
So far as the costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to the petitioner is concerned, learned counsel for respondent No.1 has produced a copy of demand draft bearing No.724122 dated 26.08.2025, drawn on the State Bank of India, MDU Rohtak Branch, amounting to Rs.50,000/- in favour of the petitioner, which shows that the costs of Rs.50,000/- has been paid to the
-4petitioner.
6.
Needless to say that the petitioner is at liberty to avail remedy as is available to him in accordance with law to challenge the speaking order dated 26.08.2025 passed by the Deputy Registrar (Estt. N.T.), O/o Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak.
7.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE 19.11.2025 Virender Whether speaking/non-speaking : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No