AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 133 wordsAbhinava Upadhya, J.
Vide order dated 24.10.2008, this Court had directed the Vice Chancellor of the University to consider the representation of the petitioner.
Since the representation of the petitioner was not being considered by the appropriate authority, the petitioner approached this Court again by filing contempt petition. Notices were issued.
Today short counter affidavits have been filed by Dr. Ravi K. Mishra appearing for the respondents wherein he has brought on record that the representation of the petitioner has been duly considered and decided and the decision has resulted in rejection of the claim of the petitioner.
Since the order of this Court has been complied with by passing order dated 30.04.2009 rejecting the representation of the petitioner, no cause of action survives in this case.
The contempt petition is accordingly dismissed.