Committee of Management Sri Swami Brahmatej Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and Another vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 17580 of 2025

Committee Of Management Sri Swami Brahmatej Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya And Another

.....Petitioner(s)

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Kaushlendra Pandey, Saurabh Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 32

¶6

HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

¶7

Heard Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Kaushlendra Pandey, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Shishir Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for State-Respondents.

¶8

This is second round of litigation. Petitioners-Committee of Management of concerned College have approached this Court earlier when some inquiry was initiated on basis of a complaint and the writ petition (Writ-A No. 2610 of 2025) was disposed of by this Court vide an order dated 03.03.2025 making certain observations and directions and for reference relevant part of order is reproduced hereinafter:

¶9

“ 5. I have considered the above submission and perused the record.

¶10

At this stage, the Court is not entering whether the notice is issued is contrary to rules, however, petitioner i.e. Committee of Management has liberty to raise such issue before the authority who has issued notice and it will incumbent upon him to decide the said issue at first instance.

¶11

WRIA No. 17580 of 2025

¶12

2

¶13

This Court has observed in Ashok Kumar Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2025:AHC:6788 that in case, any complaint is filed that should be accompanied by an affidavit of complainant, wherein it should be mentioned that in case, objections raised by complainant are found to be untrue or vague, criminal as well as civil action may be taken against him, therefore, the respondent concerned will also comply the said direction and will sought such affidavit from the complainant before proceeding further.

¶14

In present case, the University has approved the appointment, therefore, concerned respondent will also issue a notice to Registrar concern of University also and their stand may also be taken note on facts as well as on law. If reply is filed to the notice within two weeks, the consideration of it be concluded within four weeks thereafter.

¶15

Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation.”

¶16

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioners submits that earlier inquiry was dropped on basis of observations of this Court. However, same complainant has made another complaint and, thereafter, a three Members Committee was constituted by a fresh impugned order. Learned Senior Advocate submits that directions passed by this Court in above order have still not been complied with, though respondents were bound to follow it even a fresh inquiry is initiated.

¶17

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for State-Respondents submits that since there is an order of this Court, therefore, respondents are duty bound to follow the same and before proceeding further the directions passed in aforesaid order shall be complied with and complainant shall be asked to submit a notarized affidavit to the effect that in case allegations made in complaint are found false, the affective party can take legal remedy against him which may include criminal or civil as well as issues raised such as jurisdiction shall also be looked into at the first instance.

¶18

WRIA No. 17580 of 2025

¶19

3

¶20

Learned Senior Advocate for petitioners has no objection if this writ petition is disposed of taking note of aforesaid submission made by learned Standing Counsel.

¶21

In aforesaid circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of taking note of aforesaid submissions as well as assurance given by learned Standing Counsel. The Inquiry Committee shall proceed further only after directions of this Court and assurance given above are complied with.

¶22

(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)

¶23

November 21, 2025 AK

¶24

Digitally signed by :- AWADESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Committee of Management Sri Swami Brahmatej Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Committee of Management Sri Swami Brahmatej Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and Another v. State of U.P. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Sitarunnisha and Another vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dr Manvendra Singh Sengar vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sobaran Singh vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others

Mayank Gupta vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others

Dhananand @ Satish vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Naseem Ahmed vs State of U.P. and 3 Others