Summary
The earlier distance-engineering-degree directions restored existing benefits after candidates passed the prescribed test; they did not automatically grant promotions or benefits never enjoyed when judgment was delivered. The junior engineers’ claims for new advantages, including disputes over departmental permission and recognition, required independent proceedings. No contempt was established, and each petitioner was ordered to pay Rs.5,000 costs.
Issues
- Whether revival of the engineering degrees required grant of previously unheld promotional benefits through contempt proceedings.
Held
- The concession for the 2001–2005 cohort allowed testing of ability and revival of degrees and associated benefits. First-attempt success avoided interruption of existing benefits; the object was restoration of the status already enjoyed. (¶ 7–10)
- Revived degrees could support entitlements otherwise available under law, but the directions did not themselves confer additional status or advantages absent at the date of the earlier judgment. (¶ 10)
- The department raised issues about permission to undertake the courses, recognition and study leave. Any claim to new promotional benefits or challenge concerning these objections required representations or properly instituted proceedings, rather than contempt. (¶ 11–12)
- No violation of the earlier directions was established. Each petitioner was required to deposit Rs.5,000 in the concerned department within four weeks, failing which recovery according to law was authorised. (¶ 13–14)
Result
Contempt petitions dismissed. Each petitioner to pay Rs.5,000 costs to the department within four weeks, failing which recovery according to law is authorised. Claims to new benefits require independent proceedings.