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


Ma Khandwari Vidhi v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. - 41287 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 14765 (31 August 2007)

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).


Court No. 33

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 41287 of 2007

Ma Khandwari Vidhi Mahavidyalaya

Chhahniya District Chandauli


State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Present writ petition has been filed by the Principal of the institution questioning the validity of the notification dated 28.08.2007 filed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition by means of which examination centre has been allotted at Pandit Kamla Pati Degree College, Chanduali for the examination 2006-07 commencing from 01.09.2007.

In District Chanduali there is an institution known as Ma Khandwari Vidhi Mahavidyalaya, Chhahniya District Chandauli. Said institution is affiliated to Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal University, Jaunpur and also duly recognized by the Bar Council of India. Petitioner submits that they have all facilities available under self finance scheme and are in position to hold examination at their respective institution but as per examination schedule published, different centre has been provided for. Petitioner submits that totally unreasonable and arbitrary decision has been taken by the University concerned, inasmuch as students of institution which are unaided and under self financing scheme, the students have been asked to appear in the examination from different institution whereas students of aided institution have been allotted self centre from where they are pursuing their studies.

Entire gist of the arguments is that policy which has been formulated is totally arbitrary, unreasonable and no object/purpose whatsoever is being achieved by the policy and students would suffer. Making of policy to hold the examination is within the domain of the examining body and it is for the Examining Body to determine as to from which place examination should be conducted and from where candidates should be permitted to appear in the examination. Once policy decision has been taken in respect of aided institution the students would be permitted to undertake the examination from self centre and in respect of unaided and under self finance institution, they would be asked to appear in the examination from different centre then as far as this Court is concerned, this Court cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner's institution in exercise of its power of judicial review. Policy decision cannot be interfered in case there are violation of constitutional rights or the policy decision is in breach of statutory provision. This Court cannot not help the petitioner as neither any Constitutional right or statutory right has been infringed and student of unaided and under self financing institution and the students of aided and institution constitute from separate class from the very nature of recognition as such in case qua them different policy decision has been taken then there is no occasion to interfere.

Consequently present writ petition is dismissed.




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.