COCP Nop.2231 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. COCP No.2231 of 2010 In CWP No.15508 of 2010 Date of decision: 04.3.2011 Dr. Mikha Singh Aulakh -----Petitioner Vs. Dr. Raj Kumar Mahey, Registrar, Agriculture University Ludhiana and another ----Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Dr. Balram Gupta, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Anamika Negi, for the petitioner. Adarsh Kumar Goel,J. This order will dispose of COCP Nos. 2231 and 2232 of 2010, as both the petitions involve common question. Facts are being taken from COCP No.2231 of 2010. Case set out in the said petition is that the petitioner was appointed as Dean, College of Agriculture, Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana on 29.1.2008 for four years or till his retirement from University service. He was due to superannuate on 31.8.2010. He filed CWP No.15508 of 2010 claiming that his age of superannuation should be treated to be 65 as per University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of teachers and other Academic staff in University and Colleges and other Measures for Maintenance of Standards in higher Education) Regulations 2010. The writ petition was ordered to be heard alongwith other connected matters and interim order of stay against retirement was also granted subject to certain conditions. Accordingly, vide order dated 7.9.2010, the petitioner was allowed to continue but by subsequent order dated 25.11.2010, he was relieved from the post of Dean and adjusted against the post of Professor. 1 COCP Nop.2231 of 2010 This action being in violation of interim order granted in favour of the petitioner amounted to contempt. We have by a separate order passed today dismissed the writ petition holding that the regulations in question did not entitle the petitioner to superannuate at the age of 65. In any case, the interim order was only against superannuation. It cannot be held that by relieving the petitioner form the post of Dean and posting him as Professor, there is willful violation of interim order of the Court. We, thus, do not find any ground to initiate contempt proceedings. Both the petitions are dismissed. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge March 04 , 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) ‘gs’ Judge 2