Allahabad High Court
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT, SHRI VAISHNAV, BHAGAVAN DESHRAJ SURIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition is disposed, with liberty to the petitioner to submit the proposal and the university to decide within four weeks.
Summary
The Committee of Management of Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri Adarsh Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya filed a writ petition alleging that the appointments of two assistant teachers (respondents 4 and 5) were illegal. The petitioner could not demonstrate that any disciplinary or statutory proceedings had been initiated against the respondents. The petitioner sought liberty to forward a proposal, along with supporting documents, to Sampurnanand University for approval or disapproval of the appointments, and requested the court to direct the university to decide expeditiously. The respondent counsel raised no objection to these submissions. The court disposed of the petition, granting the petitioner liberty to submit any proposal (fresh or old) and directing the university to take a decision within four weeks of receipt.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, can the High Court grant in a writ petition where the petitioner has not shown that any statutory proceeding has been initiated against the respondents?
- Whether the court can direct the university to decide on the appointment proposals within a specified time.
Legislation cited
- Sampurnanand University Act
Subjects
- appointment
- assistant teacher
- university statutes
- writ petition
- committee of management
- higher education
- procedural lapse
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6671 of 2026
Committee Of Management, Shri Vaishnav,
Bhagavan Deshraj Suri .....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Dilip Kumar Dubey, Sameer
Srivastava, Shivanshu Mehta
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Shesh Kumar Srivastava
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Mr. Sameer Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr. Shesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the
Respondent.
2. The Committee of Management has come up with a specific case
that the appointment of respondent nos. 4 and 5 as assistant teacher
in Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri, Adarsh Sanskrit,
Mahavidyalaya, Jaunpur were bad in law. Though at this stage
Mr. Sameer Srivastava on basis of pleadings and record is not able to
show that the Committee of Management of the said College has
undertaken any proceedings against the said respondents.
3. Learned counsel further submitted that it being a very old matter,
there must be some proceedings against the said respondents and
further prays that in case a proceeding has already been undertaken
in terms of the relevant provisions of the statute of Sampurnanand
University, the petitioner Committee of Management will sent the
proposal along with the relevant document to the university for
approval and prays that in such case a decision for approval or
disapproval, be taken by the University concerned expeditiously or in
case the Committee of Management has still not taken any
proceedings against the private respondents, they may be permitted
to do so.
WRIA No. 6671 of 2026
2
4. Mr. Shesh Kumar Srivastava has no objection to the aforesaid
submissions.
5. In the aforesaid circumstances, with the aforesaid liberties this writ
petition is disposed of with further observation that in case the
petitioner sends any proposal, fresh or old as the case may be, the
concerned respondent will take appropriate decision within four
weeks thereafter.
(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
May 5, 2026
Kumar Manish
Digitally signed by :-
MANISH TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…