Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7015 (GAU)

DR ARUP BHATTACHARJEE v. PROF DILIP KUMAR BAIDYA

Cont.Cas(C)/77/2025 · 2025-02-18

N Unni Krishnan Nair

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010023932025 2025:GAU-AS:1790-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Cont.Cas(C)/77/2025 DR ARUP BHATTACHARJEE SON OF LATE AMALENDU BHATTACHARJEE, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF CSE, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, SILCHAR, ASSAM PIN- 788010. VERSUS PROF DILIP KUMAR BAIDYA DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SILCHAR AND CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF GOVERNORS, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SILCHAR, CACHAR, ASSAM, INDIA, PIN- 788010. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S NATH, MS. R BHARALI,MS R MEDHI Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 19.02.2025 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ) Heard Mr. Subrata Nath, learned counsel for the petitioner. This Contempt Petition is filed by the petitioner, herein, alleging willful disobedience of the directions given by the Division Bench of this Court in WA No. 55/2023. Page No.# 2/2 We have gone through the order, dated 17.02.2023, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WA No. 55/2023, and find that, as such, no direction is given to the respondent(s) which they have to comply with. The Division Bench of this Court has simply affirmed the decision of the learned Single Judge, dated 21.07.2022, passed in WP(c)5055/2017, wherein, some directions have been given, which are to be complied with by the respondent(s). We are of the considered view that if the petitioner feels that the said directions given by the learned Single Judge, referred to above, has not been complied with; the proper Court for the petitioner to prefer a contempt petition in the matter, if so advised, is before the learned Single Judge and not before the Division Bench of this Court. Hence, the instant contempt petition stands dismissed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant