Pradip Kumar Das Vs. Mohan Chandra Boro and Others

Pradip Kumar Das vs Mohan Chandra Boro and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Guwahati Decided Jan 27, 2014

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1172923

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1172923
Court: Guwahati High Court
Judge: The Honourable Chief Justice Mr. a. M. Sapre
Decided On: Jan 27, 2014
Case Number: Cont. Case(C) No.124, 125, 126, 127, 128 of 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pradip Kumar Das

Advocate Mr. S.K. Kejriwal

Respondent

Mohan Chandra Boro and Others

Advocate Mr. G. Rahul

Excerpt

heard mr. s.k. kejriwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and mr g. rahul, learned counsel for the respondents. this contempt application arises out of an order dated 24.6.2011 passed by the learned single judge in wp(c) no.3217 of 2011. notice of this contempt application was issued to the respondents. the respondents are served and duly represented. learned counsel for the respondents at the outset submitted that the order in question has since been complied with by the respondents and the same is clear from the letter dated 7th august, 2012 sent by the respondent to the petitioner purporting to be in compliance to the order out of which this contempt application arises. having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records of the case and after taking into account the nature of the controversy raised, i am inclined to dismiss this contempt application with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the impugned compliance said to have been made by the respondents in compliance to the order passed by this court out of which this contempt application arises in appropriate proceeding in accordance with law in case if he feels dis-satisfied with the compliance. needless to observe, in case if any such legal recourse is taken by the petitioner by challenging the purported compliance, dismissal of this contempt application would not come in his way in prosecuting the remedy in accordance with law. subject to the aforesaid observations, this contempt application fails and is accordingly dismissed. rule nisi issued against the respondents is hereby recalled.

Full Judgment

Heard Mr. S.K. Kejriwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr G. Rahul, learned counsel for the respondents.

This contempt application arises out of an order dated 24.6.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No.3217 of 2011.

Notice of this contempt application was issued to the respondents. The respondents are served and duly represented.

Learned counsel for the respondents at the outset submitted that the order in question has since been complied with by the respondents and the same is clear from the letter dated 7th August, 2012 sent by the respondent to the petitioner purporting to be in compliance to the order out of which this contempt application arises.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records of the case and after taking into account the nature of the controversy raised, I am inclined to dismiss this contempt application with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the impugned compliance said to have been made by the respondents in compliance to the order passed by this Court out of which this contempt application arises in appropriate proceeding in accordance with law in case if he feels dis-satisfied with the compliance.

Needless to observe, in case if any such legal recourse is taken by the petitioner by challenging the purported compliance, dismissal of this contempt application would not come in his way in prosecuting the remedy in accordance with law.

Subject to the aforesaid observations, this contempt application fails and is accordingly dismissed.

Rule nisi issued against the respondents is hereby recalled.

Same Court & Year Guwahati · 2014 Same Parties Pradip Kumar Das vs Mohan Chandra Boro and Others Same Subject Education Same Judge The Honourable Chief Justice Mr. a. M. Sapre