Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040011152025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/20/2025 Dr Sukumar Baishya and 7 Ors Professor, Civil Engineering, NERIST, resident of NERIST campus, Nirjuli, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Dr Benudhar Nayak Age: Occupation : Professor Department of Humanities and Social Science NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 3: Dr Ram Krishna Mehata Age: Occupation : Professor Department of Electrical Engineering NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 4: Dr Ranendar Prasad Age: Page No.# 2/5 Occupation : Professor Humanities and Social Science NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 5: Dr Harendra Prasad Singh Age: Occupation : Professor Civil Engineering NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 6: S K Bhagat Age: Occupation : Professor Department of Electrical Engineering NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 7: Dr Akhilesh Kumar Gupta Age: Occupation : Professor Department of Chemistry NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 8: Dr Sachindra Mahto Age: Occupation : Professor Department of Mechanical Engineering NERIST Page No.# 3/5 resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS Vineet Joshi and 3 Ors Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Room No.128, C Wing, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi 2:Narendranath S Age: 0 Occupation : Director NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 3:Dr M K Camdir Age: 0 Occupation : Registrar NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 4:M S M Rawat Age: 0 Occupation : Chairman Board of Management NERIST resident of NERIST campus Nirjuli Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh Advocate for the Petitioner : Dicky Panging, Sr. Adv, Marge Doji,Daina Tamuk Page No.# 4/5 Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 16-06-2026 (S. P. Khaund J.) Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. D. Panging, assisted by learned counsel Mr. D. Lona, is present for the petitioners, who have filed this contempt petition for non-compliance with the order dated 29.07.2024 passed in WP(C) No. 304(AP)/2020 and the order dated 09.04.2025 passed by the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 25/2024, directing NERIST and the Ministry of Education, Government of India, to implement the decision reflected in the order dated 12.01.2016 within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of the order. 2. The appeal filed by the respondents against the order dated 29.07.2024 passed in WP(C) No. 304(AP)/2020 was dismissed and thereafter, the respondents filed a Special Leave Petition registered as Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 59361/2025, which was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 30.01.2026. 3. In this case, the respondents sought 3 (three) months’ time to comply with the order dated 29.07.2024 passed in WP(C) No. 304(AP)/2020. 4. Today, learned Senior Counsel, Mr. N. Kr. Kaushik, assisted by learned counsel Ms. S. Dolo, appearing for the respondents, has submitted that the matter was fixed today for placing on record the progress report regarding compliance with the directions issued by this Court. Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Page No.# 5/5 N. Kr. Kaushik, further submits that full compliance has been carried out and the amounts have been deposited in the accounts of the writ petitioners/contempt petitioners. 5. A compliance affidavit on behalf of respondent No. 1, which is stated to have been filed, will be submitted during the course of the day. 6. Learned Senior Counsel, Mr. D. Panging, has submitted that the amounts have been received in the accounts of the petitioners, but they are not aware of the manner in which the calculations have been apportioned in favour of the petitioners. 7. We have considered the submissions made at the Bar and in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct both the parties to settle any differences relating to the calculations amongst themselves. In the event any grievance persists, the petitioners shall be at liberty to approach this Court. 8. Accordingly, this contempt petition stands closed. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant