Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C/M. KANYA MAHA VIDYALAYA ARYA SAMAJ BHOOR BAREILLY & ORS. versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C/M. Kanya Maha Vidyalaya Arya Samaj Bhoor Bareilly & Ors. v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 28048 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 18156 (27 October 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Civil ZMisc. Writ Petition No. 28048 of 2006

C/M Kanya Mahavidyalaya Arya Samaj Bhoor, Bareilly and another.....Petitioners

vs

The State of UP and others                                       ...........................Respondents.

HON'BLE YATINDRA SINGH, J.

HON'BLE RAN VIJAI SINGH, J.  

1. The Kanya Mahavidyalaya Arya Samaj Bhoor, Bareilly (the college) is affiliated to MJP Rohilkhand University (the University). It was granted temporary affiliation for two years with effect from 1.7.1994 by the Chancellor. This affiliation was renewed from time to time. Thereafter the chancellor by his order dated 10.4.2005 has rejected the affiliation. Hence the present writ petition.

2. We have heard counsel for the petitioner, standing counsel, Sri Neeraj Tripathi and Sri Govind Saran for the respondents.

3. The impugned order is dated 10.4.2005 whereas the writ petition was filed in the month of May, 2006. The petitioner in paragraphs no. 35 and 36 of the writ petition has stated that there is a mistake in the date of the order and it should be dated 10.4.2006 and not 10.4.2005. This assertion seems to be correct because the order refers to a letter dated 10.7.2005. This is not possible unless the order is of a date subsequent to 10.7.2005. It is also stated that the letter was despatched on 12.4.2006. These facts have not been specifically denied in the counter affidavit. The writ petition can not be dismissed on the ground of latches in filing the writ petition or for this mistake of the respondent in the order.

4. The only reason mentioned in the impugned order, for rejecting the affiliation is that the college does not have the land according to the standard. The order nowhere indicates as to how much land should the college have according to the standard and how much land does the petitioner have. The college was granted affiliation as far as back on 18.1.1995 for two years with effect from 1.7.1994. It is not the affiliation granted for the first time. If the college had the land according to standard at that time, it is not understood as to how the college does not have the land according to the standard at present. In view of this, the order dated 10.4.2005 is quashed. The Chancellor may pass a fresh orders in accordance with law at an early date, if possible, within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

5. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

Date: 27.10.2004

SKS


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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