Disposed

Gramin Mukt Vidhyalayi Shiksha Sansthan v. State of Hp through Pr.Secretary

Himachal Pradesh HC10 Mar 2022CWP/313/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition filed by an educational institution aggrieved by the cancellation of an earlier equivalence order. The court permitted the petitioner to approach the respondents via a comprehensive representation.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the respondents by way of a comprehensive representation. Respondents to decide within three months.

Gramin Mukt Vidhyalayi Shiksha Sansthan Vs… — Education and Admissions | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA ON THE 10^th DAY OF MARCH, 2022

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶4

¶5

HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

¶6

CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.313 of 2019

¶7

Between:-

¶8

GRAMEEN MUKT VIDHYALAYI SHIKSHA SANSTHAN, M-151, KESHAV CHOWK, PANCHSIL GARDAN, NAVEEN SHAHDRA, DELHI-32, THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY-CUM-GENERAL SECRETARYSH. SUSHIL KUMAR S/O SH. ROSHAN LAL, R/O VILLAGE SADOH, P.O. MANSAL, TEHSIL NADAUN, DISTRICT HAMIRPUR

¶9

…...PETITIONER

¶10

(BY MR. PRANAY PRATAP SINGH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND

¶12

1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (EDUCATION) TO GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-2

¶13

2. STATE LEVEL BOARD OF EQUIVALENCE COMMITTEE THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (EDUCATION) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA-2

¶14

3. HIMACHAL PRADESH BOARD OF SCHOOL EDUCATION, DHARAMSHALA, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY

¶15

…...RESPONDENTS

¶16

- 2 -

¶17

(MR. ADARSH SHARMA, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR R-1 & R-2,

¶18

MR. VIRBAHADUR VERMA, ADVOCATE, FOR R-3)

¶19

This petition coming on for admission this day, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq, passed the following:

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This petition was filed by the petitioner-Grameen Mukt Vidhyalayi Shiksha Sansthan, aggrieved by the notification dated 05.02.2019 and decision of respondent No.2 dated 01.02.2019, whereby the notification dated 01.02.2017 was withdrawn and equivalence granted in favour of the petitioner was cancelled. The petitioner is also aggrieved by fresh notification dated 11.02.2019 issued to the same effect.

¶22

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that instead of pursuing the matter, the petitiner may be permitted to approach the respondents by way of a comprehensive representation.

¶23

3. Having regard to the submissions made, but without commenting on the merits of the matter, we dispose of the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondents/competent authority by way of a comprehensive representation. In case any such representation is made, the

¶24

- 3 -

¶25

respondents shall consider and decide the same within a period of three months from the date of submission of the representation alongwith copy of this order.

¶26

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms,

¶27

so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

¶28

( Mohammad Rafiq ) Chief Justice

¶29

March 10, 2022 R.Atal/Mukesh

¶30

( Jyotsna Rewal Dua ) Judge

Gramin Mukt Vidhyalayi Shiksha Sansthan v. State of Hp through Pr.Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gramin Mukt Vidhyalayi Shiksha Sansthan v. State of Hp through Pr.Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajani Vs Hrtc and Ors.

Saksham Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Punjab Singh Vs Hrtc and Anr.

Sarla Mehta Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Baby Thakur Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Desh Raj Vs State of Hp