Disposed

Ram Sewak v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Jan 2021WPC/3503/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand disposed of a writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to submit a fresh representation to the Vice Chancellor of Vinoba Bhave University. The court directed the Vice Chancellor to take an informed decision after providing a hearing opportunity within three months, without deciding the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to file fresh representation with the Vice Chancellor; direction to VC to decide after hearing within three months.

Ram Sewak Vs the State of Jharkhand — Education and Admissions | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

W.P.(C) No. 3503 of 2020

Ram Sewak

... … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

The Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶9

The Director, Department of Higher Education, Government of Jharkhand

¶10

The Vinoba Bhave University, through its Registrar, Hazaribag

¶11

Amba Prasad, Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA), Barkagaon, District- Hazaribag

¶12

Dr. Indrajeet Kumar, Dean of Student Welfare (DSW), Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribag

¶13

Tukeshwar Prasad, Secretary, Karnpura College, Barkagaon, District- Hazaribag

¶14

Jyothi Jaldhar, Acting Principal, Karnpura College, Barkagaon, District- Hazaribag

¶15

The Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribag

¶16

… …Respondents

¶17

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶18

For the Petitioner :- Mr. Abhishek Krishna Gupta, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Ravi Prakash Mishra, A.C. to A.A.G.-II For Resp. nos. 4 & 9 :- Mr. Surya Singh, A.C. to Mr. Kumar Harsh, Advocate

¶19

Order No. 03 Dated: 14.01.2021

¶20

The present case is taken up through video conferencing.

¶21

2. At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the remaining defects, as pointed out by the office, are ignored.

¶22

3. Counsel for the petitioner prays for and is allowed to implead “the Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribag” as respondent no. 9 in the present writ petition.

¶23

4. Considering the present situation prevailing due to outbreak of coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, office is directed to make necessary insertion with regard to impleadment of the respondent no. 9, as stated above, in the cause title of the writ petition.

¶24

5. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the respondent no. 9 (wrongly mentioned as respondent no. 4 in paragraph nos. 1 and 23 as well as prayer portion of the writ petition) to constitute an ad hoc committee for the management and administration of Karnpura College, Barkagaon as mandated under

¶25

¶26

Section 60 (4) of the Jharkhand State University Act, 2000 (hereinafter to be referred as “the Act, 2000) till constitution of the Governing Body in terms with Section 60 (1) of the Act, 2000. Further prayer has been made of setting aside the notification as contained in memo no. VBU/Esstt/IOC-25/825/2020 dated 18.05.2020 issued under the signature of the respondent no. 4- the Registrar, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribag as well as to set aside the decisions taken on 20.05.2020 by the Governing Body presided by the respondent no. 6. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction that no grant should be allowed to be withdrawn by anyone from the Treasury in relation to the said college until the Governing Body is constituted in accordance with law.

¶27

6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the prayer made in the writ petition as well as on going through the provisions of Section 60 (4) of the Act, 2000, without entering into the merit of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to file fresh representation before the respondent no. 9- the Vice Chancellor, Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribag, on the present issue. On receipt of the said representation, the respondent no. 9, after providing due opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties, shall take appropriate informed decision within three months from the date of filing of the said representation.

¶28

7. The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

¶29

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶30

Ritesh/

Ram Sewak v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sewak v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashwani Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ms Darshana Stone Works through Its Partner Satish Kumar Das Vs State of Jharkhand through Secretary Department of Mines

Janak Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pradip Kumar Khatuwala Vs Nagar Parishad Jhumri Telaiya through the Admintrator

Ms Darshana Stone Works Represented through Its Partner Ram Lakhan Singh Vs State of Jharkhand

Parameshwar Kumar Nayak Vs the State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary