Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C/M. RAGHUNATH GIRLS (P.G.) COLLEGE, MEERUT THRU' ITS SECY. versus CHANCELLOR, CHAUDHARY CHARAN SINGH UNIVERSITY, MEERUT & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C/M. Raghunath Girls (P.G.) College, Meerut Thru' Its Secy. v. Chancellor, Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 20196 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 7665 (13 April 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

COURT NO.34

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.20196 of 2006

Committee of Management, Raghunath Girls (P.G.) College, Meerut

Vs.

Chancellor, Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut & Ors.

Hon'ble. Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.

Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J.

This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 23.03.2006 (Annex.1) passed by the learned Chancellor of Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut in exercise of powers under Section 37 (9) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter called the ''Act 1973').

The petitioner College had been granted permanent affiliation for the purpose of running the B. Ed. Course, after being fully satisfied that it fulfilled all the requirements in law including the recognition by the National Council for Teacher Education (hereinafter called the ''NCTE'). The impugned order dated 23rd March, 2006 reveals that before passing the same, the learned Chancellor had called for reports from three authorities; one from the Divisional Commissioner, Meerut, the other from the University and the third report from the State Government and after taking into consideration the aforesaid three reports, the order impugned has been passed. The impugned order also makes a reference to the reply filed by the present petitioner to the show cause notice given to it. However, neither the date on which the show cause notice had been issued to the present petitioner has been mentioned nor it reveals as to whether the copies of the three reports, which had been taken into consideration by the learned Chancellor, had ever been made available to the petitioner. However, specific averments have been made in various paragraphs of this petition particularly paragraph nos. 25 26, 29 and 30 that the order has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the present petitioner and the copy of the aforesaid three reports relied upon by the learned Chancellor have never been served upon the petitioner and the date of notice alleged to have been issued to the petitioner and the date of submission of its reply has also not been disclosed.

In view of the aforesaid fact situation, the writ petition deserves to be allowed and the order impugned is liable to be set aside.

The writ petition succeeds and is allowed and the order impugned dated 23rd March, 2006 passed by the learned Chancellor, Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut  is set aside. The case is remanded to the learned Chancellor to decide the matter afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the present petitioner, as is provided for in Section 37 (9) of the Act, 1973 itself.

13.04.2006

AHA


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.