The petitioner challenged non-action on a Ph.D. thesis submitted in 1994. The Court held the petition was filed under Public Interest Litigation guise by a guide and closed the writ petition without costs.
No order was passed granting the petitioner's prayers; the petition was closed.
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 JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05-11-2014
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
WRIT PETITION No.4242 of 1997
Dr.G.Muthuveerappan .. Petitioner
vs
1.The Chairman
Board of Governors
Indian Institute of Technology
Chennai 600 036
2.The Director
Indian Institute of Technology
Chennai 600 036
3.Prof. V.Ramamurthi
Member
Doctoral Committee
Department of Applied Mechanics
Indian Institute of Technology
Chennai 600 036
4.Dr.N.Sivaprasad
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology
Chennai 600 036
5.Prof.K.Lakshminarayana
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology
Chennai 600 036 .. Respondents
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to take expeditious steps to obtain thesis report for the thesis submitted on 21.3.1994, as contemplated under Ph.D. Ordinances and regulations of Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai and to further consider the petitioner's guidance of Ph.D. for selection of faculty positions held in 1996.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Shanmugakani For Respondents : Mr.T.Srinivasamoorthy ACGSC for RR1 and 4 Mrs.Radha Gopalan for R2
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Learned Counsel for petitioner fairly states that he has not received any instructions about the current position. It is a case where under the guise of Public Interest Litigation, the Guide of certain students seeks to protect the rights of his pupil, who he states did not indulge in prejudicial act. If any of the pupils were affected, they themselves could have approached the Court against any action taken by the second respondent-Institute.
2.We, thus, close the writ petition. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
nsv
To:
1.The Chairman
Board of Governors
Indian Institute of Technology
Chennai 600 036
2.The Director
Indian Institute of Technology
Chennai 600 036
W.P.No.4242 of 1997
PPA(CO)
EU 13.11.14
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should issue a writ of mandamus directing the Institute to act expeditiously on a Ph.D. thesis submitted years ago.
Dr.G.Muthuveerappan
The Chairman Board of Governors Indian Institute of Technology Chennai
The Director Indian Institute of Technology Chennai
Prof. V.Ramamurthi
Dr.N.Sivaprasad
Prof.K.Lakshminarayana
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
M. SATHYANARAYANAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
