Allahabad High Court

THE COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT SAKALDIHA POST GRADUATE COLLEGE AND ANOTHERversusPROFESSOR ANAND KUMAR TYAGI AND ANOTHER

Decided: 19 April 2026
Bench: ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL

Holding

The writ Court set aside the impugned order, directed the parties to approach the Vice‑Chancellor with a hearing, and dismissed the contempt application.

Summary

The Committee of Management of Sakaldiha Post Graduate College filed a contempt application after the High Court set aside an order dated 17 May 2025 passed by the Registrar of Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapeeth, which had appointed an authorized controller without hearing the petitioners. The petitioners argued that the order violated natural justice and was arbitrary. The Court, noting that the writ petition had only made an innocuous prayer to have the Vice‑Chancellor decide the election dispute, set aside the impugned order and directed the parties to approach the Vice‑Chancellor, giving all affected parties a hearing. The opposite party later complied with the remand order, and the Court held that no contempt had arisen. Consequently, the contempt application was dismissed, though the petitioners were permitted to challenge the subsequent order in the appropriate forum.

Issues considered

Whether the order passed by the Registrar without hearing the petitioners violates the principles of natural justice and should be set aside.
Whether the failure to comply with the writ Court’s remand order amounts to contempt of court.
Whether the writ petition can be disposed by directing the parties to approach the Vice‑Chancellor for resolution of the election dispute.

Subjects

natural justice
certiorari
mandamus
contempt of court
university administration
election of committee
procedural fairness

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 7152 of 2025

The Committee Of Management Sakaldiha Post
Graduate College And Another .....Applicant(s)
Versus

Professor Anand Kumar Tyagi And Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shivendu Ojha, Sneh Pandey, Sr.
Advocate
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

Court No. - 9
HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.

1. The writ Court on 21.08.2025 while disposing of Writ-C No. 19213 of
2025 passed the following order:-

"Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No.NIL of 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant/petitioners.

2. The grounds shown in the affidavit filed in support of impleadment
application, are found to be sufficient.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents has no objection.

4. Application is allowed.

5. Learned counsel for applicant/petitioners is directed to amend the
memo of parties, during the course of the day.

Order on Writ Petition

1. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking following main reliefs:-

"(a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing
the impugned order dated 17.5.2025 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition)
passed by the Registrar, Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapeeth, Varanasi,
the Respondent No.2.
CAPL No. 7152 of 2025
2

(b) Issue a writ order of direction in the nature of Mandamus
commanding the Respondent-Authorities not to interfere in peaceful
functioning of the Petitioners Committee of Management."

2. Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Shivendu Ojha,
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners vehemently
submitted that the impugned order has been passed by respondent no.2,
without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, which is contrary
to the principles of natural justice. It is also submitted that respondent
no.2 while passing the impugned order, has not taken into consideration
the certain facts and documents in proper perspective and passed the
order arbitrarily, without application of mind to appoint the authorized
controller. Sri Ojha, further submitted that the petitioners' tenure has not
yet expired and there are no legal election has been held. Therefore, the
impugned order deserves to be set aside.

3. Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners without entering into merits of the case, made an innocuous
prayer that the petitioners may be permitted to approach the Vice-
Chancellor of the Institution raising all the disputes. Thereafter, the Vice-
Chancellor of the Institution may be directed to decide the entire disputes
regarding election of Committee of Management of the Institution, which
is pending before him, in time bound manner.

4. Per contra, Sri N.K. Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of respondent no.4, vehemently opposed the instant writ petition on merits
and submitted that the election has already been held on 15.05.2025 and
same has been pending before the Vice-Chancellor for approval. It is also
fairly conceded that the impugned order has been passed without giving
opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and has no objection, on the
Vice-Chancellor may be directed to decide the entire disputes regarding
election of Committee of Management of the Institution, which is pending
before the Vice-Chancellor, after giving opportunity of hearing to all the
effected parties and taking into consideration of all the relevant
documents pertains to the disputes in time bound manner.

5. Learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents
has also not opposed the innocuous prayer as made by learned counsel
CAPL No. 7152 of 2025
3

appearing on behalf of the petitioners.

6. Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Shivendu
Ojha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Sri J.N. Rai,
learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel appeared on advance notice
on behalf of the State-respondent nos.1 & 3, Sri Lavlesh Kumar Shukla,
learned counsel appeared on advance notice on behalf of respondent
no.2, Sri N.K. Chaturvedi, learned counsel appeared on advance notice
on behalf of respondent no.4 and perused the contents made in the writ
petition.

7. Since, the matter has not been pressed on the merits at this stage and
only made an innocuous prayer that the Vice-Chancellor may be directed
to decide the entire disputes, I am inclined to allow the innocuous prayer
made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners as no
objection made on behalf of learned Standing counsel appearing on
behalf of State-respondents.

8. In view of the above, the impugned order is set aside and the parties
are directed to approach the Vice-Chancellor of the Institution raising all
the disputes regarding election of Committee of Management of the
Institution, within ten days from the date of production of certified copy of
this order. Thereafter, the Vice-Chancellor is directed that after giving
opportunity of hearing to all the effected parties and taking into
consideration of all the relevant documents pertains to the disputes to
pass appropriate and reasoned order, in accordance with law,
expeditiously, preferably within a period eight weeks.

9. With the aforesaid directions/observations, the present writ petition is
disposed of."

2. From the perusal of the order of the writ Court, it is clear that the
applicant was not given opportunity of hearing by the opposite party and the
matter was set aside remanding back the matter to the opposite party to
decide afresh after giving opportunity of hearing.

3. Shri Lovlesh Kumar Shukla, counsel appearing for the opposite party no.
1 has placed before the Court the decision taken by the authority post
CAPL No. 7152 of 2025
4

remand by the writ Court on 03.11.2025.

4. In view of said fact, as the order of writ Court has been complied with, no
case for contempt is made out.

5. The contempt application stands dismissed.

6. Contempt notice stands discharged.

7. However, it is open to the applicant to assail the order passed by opposite
party before the appropriate forum, if so advised.

(Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.)
April 20, 2026
A. V. Singh

Digitally signed by :-
AJAY VIKRAM SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…