Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Ch. Charan Singh Memorial Trust And Another v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 8635 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 3321 (14 February 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli, J.

Hon'ble Vikram Nath, J.

It appears from the record of this writ petition that the objection about the land of the college not being up to the prescribed standard does not take into account the fact that the prescribed standard in respect of the girls institution is lower and the petitioner has more than prescribed area of the land.  The second objection about non-approval of the Principal has already been removed by the subsequent approval dated 1.2.2006, vide annexure-11 to this writ petition. So far as fourth objection is concerned that 3 out of 7 teachers selected by the petitioner's institution are working/approved elsewhere does not take into account the fact that the college has not yet been opened and the teachers selected have given their affidavits that they will work in this institution for the sessions 2005-06.  So far as third objection is concerned about the lack of affidavits of the teachers selected and the affidavit of the management that does not appear to be correct as these affidavits have been enclosed as annexures to this writ petition.

However, it has been pointed out by Sri Neeraj Tripathi, representing the Chancellor that the Chancellor had passed the order dated 5.12.2005 refusing affiliation for the sessions 2005-06 whereas some of the defect has been removed subsequently.

Since the defects have been removed now therefore it appears appropriate to require the Chancellor to reconsider the matter with reasons after calling for fresh report from the University, if necessary, with regard to the contention of the petitioner regarding objections raised to the affiliation earlier.

In the circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition finally requiring the Chancellor i.e. respondent no. 2 to reconsider the matter in the light of the subsequent events which may be pointed out by way of a detailed representation along with certified copy of this order within one month of the date on which these documents are presented before the Chancellor by the petitioner.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.