Disposed¶15

Committee of Management, Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others

Allahabad HC4 May 2026WRIA/6671/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WRIT - A No. 6671 of 2026; Committee of Management, Shri Vaishnav Bhagavan Deshraj Suri v. State of U.P. and others; challenge to appointment of assistant teachers; Adarsh Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Jaunpur; statute of Sampurnanand University; approval/disapproval of proposal by University; liberty to initiate proceedings; decision within four weeks; writ petition disposed of; decided May 5, 2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner Committee of Management to send a proposal (fresh or old) to the University/concerned respondent; the concerned respondent to take an appropriate decision within four weeks of receipt of such proposal. ¶15

Committee of Management, Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the appointment of respondent nos. 4 and 5 as assistant teachers in Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri, Adarsh Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Jaunpur was bad in law.

¶10

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with the observation that if the petitioner sends any proposal, fresh or old, the concerned respondent will take an appropriate decision within four weeks thereafter.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

Liberties granted as prayed: where proceedings have already been undertaken under the statute of Sampurnanand University, the petitioner Committee of Management may send its proposal with relevant documents to the University for approval/disapproval to be decided expeditiously; where no proceedings have been taken against the private respondents, the Committee is permitted to initiate them.

¶15

Key takeaways

The Court noted that, on the pleadings and record, learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to show that the Committee of Management had undertaken any proceedings against respondent nos. 4 and 5.obiter¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.) disposed of a writ petition by a college management committee challenging the appointment of respondent nos. 4 and 5 as assistant teachers in Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri, Adarsh Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Jaunpur. Counsel could not point to any proceedings initiated against the appointees. Disposing of the petition with liberties, the Court directed that if the petitioner sends any proposal, fresh or old, the concerned respondent shall take an appropriate decision within four weeks; where proceedings already exist under the statute of Sampurnanand University, the proposal with documents is to go to the University for approval/disapproval to be decided expeditiously, and where none exist, the Committee may initiate them.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

WRIT - A No. - 6671 of 2026

¶3

Committee Of Management, Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri

¶4

.....Petitioner(s) Versus

¶5

State Of Uttar Pradesh And 4 Others

¶6

			.....Resp	ondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Dilip Srivast	Kumar ava, Shivan	Dubey, shu Mehta	Sameer
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: C.S.C.,	Shesh Kum	ar Srivastav	a

¶7

Court No. - 32

¶8

HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

¶9

Heard Mr. Sameer Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the Respondent.

¶10

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.

¶11

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.

¶12

WRIA No. 6671 of 2026

¶13

¶14

Mr. Shesh Kumar Srivastava has no objection to the aforesaid submissions.

¶15

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.

¶16

(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)

¶17

May 5, 2026 Kumar Manish

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Committee of Management, Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri v. State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Committee of Management, Shri Vaishnav, Bhagavan Deshraj Suri v. State of Uttar Pradesh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Balbir Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Baidya Nath Kushwaha and Another vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

C/M Vishwanath Seth College of Pharamacy and Paramedical vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 5 Others

Udaiveer Singh Solanki and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Manoj Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Kumar Vs State of Up and 3 Others