Dismissed¶25

Maharshi University of Management and Technology v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC12 Jul 2026WA/364/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; WA No. 364 of 2024; writ appeal against dismissal of WPC No. 4324 of 2023; appeal dismissed as infructuous; inquiry by Governor-constituted Committee concluded, report with State Government; prayer to quash police interrogation notice not pursued; no FIR registered on NSUI office-bearer's complaint; liberty reserved to take recourse to law.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous, because the Committee constituted by Hon'ble the Governor has already concluded the inquiry on the allegations made by respondent No.2 and the report has been submitted, with the State Government to take a call upon it. ¶25

Maharshi University of Management and Technology Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice issued by the Police Officer on the complaint of respondent No.2, for interrogation purposes, ought to be quashed. +1 more

¶24

Court's answer

The appellants' apprehension that the police would proceed against them in pursuance of the notice issued does not appear to be sustainable, as the inquiry by the Committee on the same set of allegations has already been concluded and the matter is sub judice.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

¶25

Key takeaways

No FIR has been registered against the appellants on the basis of the complaint made by respondent No.2.obiter¶28
If any action is taken by the Police against the appellants, they are at liberty to take recourse to law.obiter¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WA No. 364 of 2024, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Division Bench: Ramesh Sinha, CJ and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J; order per Ramesh Sinha, CJ; dated 13.07.2026). Writ appeal under Section 2(1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006 by Maharshi University of Management and Technology (through its Registrar, Dr. Vijay Garudik) and its Vice Chancellor against the learned Single Judge's order dated 19.02.2024 in WPC No. 4324 of 2023 dismissing their writ petition. Held: with the Committee constituted by Hon'ble the Governor having already concluded the inquiry on the allegations made by complainant/private respondent No.2 (Shri Ranjeet Singh) and the report submitted for the State Government's call, the appeal was dismissed as having become infructuous. Observations: the apprehension of police action pursuant to the notice issued on respondent No.2's complaint is unsustainable, the inquiry on the same set of allegations being concluded and the matter sub judice; no FIR was registered on respondent No.2's complaint; if any police action is taken against the appellants, they are at liberty to take recourse to law.

¶1

¶2

CGHC010189612024 2026:CGHC:29284-DB

¶3

NAFR

¶4

ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA

¶5

Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

WA No. 364 of 2024

¶8

1 - Maharshi University of Management and Technology Through its Registrar, Dr. Vijay Garudik, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Maharishi Road, Mangla, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 495001

¶9

2 - The Vice Chancellor Maharshi University of Management And Technology, Maharishi Road, Mangla, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 495001

¶10

... Appellants

¶11

versus

¶12

1 - The State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Station House Officer, Police Station, Civil Lines, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶13

2 - Shri Ranjeet Singh District President, National Students Union of India, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

For Appellant : Mr. Anshuman Singh, Advocate through video conferencing and Mr. Vaibav A. Goverdhan, Advocate For Respondent No.1 / : Mr. Prasun Bhaduri, Dy. Advocate General State For Respondent No.2 : Ms. Rashika Soni, Advocate

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge

¶17

Order on Board

¶18

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶19

13.07 .2026

¶20

Heard Mr. Anshuman Singh, appearing through videoconferencing and Mr. Vaibhav A. Goverdhan, learned counsel for

¶21

¶22

the appellants. Also heard Mr. Prasun Bhaduri, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondent No.1 and Ms. Rashika Soni, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.2.

¶23

By way of present writ appeal under Section 2 of Sub-Section (1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench Act, 2006, the appellants, who were petitioner in the writ petition have challenged the impugned order dated 19.02.2024 passed by learned Single Judge in WPC No. 4324 of 2023, whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners / appellant herein has been dismissed.

¶24

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted the Committee constituted by Hon’ble the Governor has already concluded the inquiry on the allegations made by the complainant / private respondent No.2 and the report has been submitted and now the State Government is required to take call upon the inquiry report. It is further submitted that so far as the notice issued by the Police Officer on the complaint for interrogation purpose is concerned, the same is uncalled for and they pray for quashing of the said notice.

¶25

In view of the same, the matter has become infructuous. Accordingly, the instant appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous .

¶26

So far as the apprehension of the petitioner that the police would

¶27

¶28

proceed against the appellants in pursuance of the notice issued, the same does not appear to be sustainable as inquiry by the Committee constituted by Hon’ble the Government on the same set of allegation has already been concluded and the matter is subjudice. It is to be noted that no FIR has been registered against the appellants on the basis of complaint made by the respondent No.2. If any action is taken by the Police against the appellants, they are liberty to take recourse to law.

¶29

Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha ) Judge Chief Justice

¶30

Chandra

Maharshi University of Management and Technology v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maharshi University of Management and Technology v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babita Paikra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Devdhar @ Devkumar Binjhwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chief Executive Officer Vs Akhilesh Kumar Singh

Ishu Pathan @ Nanna Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jagdeep Singh Chhabra Vs Ajeet Singh Chhabra

Lakhan Patre Vs State of Chhattisgarh