Writ petition challenging the university order regularizing services from 21.03.1999 based on the S. C. Agrawal Commission's recommendation accepted by the Apex Court. Court held petitioner lacks jurisdiction to challenge Apex Court decisions and dismissal is consequential.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (S) No. 667 of 2008
Dr. Uttam Kumar Trigunait ...... .....Petitioner Vrs.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Adv. For the Resp. –State : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Shahi, AC to AAG-II
26/22.04.2019
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for direction upon the respondent for shifting the date of absorption under the University Service at least from the year 1988.
From the pleadings, it is admitted fact that recommendation has been made by the Hon’ble S. C. Agrawal Commission in the case of the petitioner w.e.f. 21.03.1999. By accepting the recommendation made by the Hon’ble S. C. Agrawal Commission, University has regularized the services of the petitioner w.e.f. 21.03.1999.
It is also an admitted fact that for resolving the dispute, the matter has been referred to the Hon’ble S. C. Agrawal Commission by the Apex Court and the Apex Court has accepted the recommendation made by the Hon’ble S. C. Agrawal Commission.
In the present litigation, the petitioner, in sum and substance, has challenged the order issued by the University dated 16.09.2005 (Annexure10), which is as per the recommendation of the Hon’ble S. C. Agrawal Commission.
From perusal of the different orders of the Apex Court, specially order dated 03.08.2007 passed in Civil Appeal No. 6098 of 1997, this Court finds that only limited scope is available with the High Court regarding implementing and non-implementing of the recommendation made by the Hon’ble S. C. Agrawal Commission and the relief prayed for by the petitioner is not within the jurisdiction of this Court.
In view of the above discussion made, this Court finds that in the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the recommendation made by the Hon’ble S. C. Agrawal Commission, which is not maintainable before this Court.
In that view of the matter, the present writ petition is, hereby, dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Kamlesh/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to implement recommendations of the S. C. Agrawal Commission made under the direction of the Apex Court in a writ petition.
Dr. Uttam Kumar Trigunait
The State of Jharkhand
Vinoba Bhave University through its Registrar, Hazaribagh
The Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh
The Principal, Markham College, Hazaribagh
Rajesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
