Disposed

M/s. Indian Centre for Academic Ranking and Excellence Private Limited, v. National Assessment and Accrediation Council

Madras HC23 Mar 2023WP/4147/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this limited-term order, the High Court of Madras did not adjudicate the merits of the petition challenging a defamatory communication but directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's explanation submitted pursuant to a show cause notice and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.

What the court decided

AI extract

M/s. Indian Centre for Academic Ranking and… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.4147 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 23.03.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

W.P.No.4147 of 2019 And

¶7

W.M.P.No.4654 of 2019

¶8

M/s.Indian Centre for Academic Ranking & Excellence Private Limited Rep. by its Vice Chairman Dr.Karthick Sridhar

¶9

... Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

National Assessment and Accreditation Council Rep. by its Director PO Box No.1075, Nagarbhavi, Bangalore – 560 072.

¶12

... Respondent

¶13

Prayer:

¶14

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Declaration to declare that the impugned Communication dated 21.01.2019 addressed to the Directorate of Higher Education, Government of Maharashtra is motivated, biased, without jurisdiction and therefore illegal and consequently forbear the respondent its men, agents and whomsoever claiming under the respondent from any manner publishing news articles and issuing communications, defaming the reputation of the petitioner company and against the petitioner company and to direct the respondent to

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

1/5

¶17

W.P.No.4147 of 2019

¶18

issue a paper publication apologising and withdrawing its defamatory articles published in various news papers across the Country.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.Murali Kumaran Senior Counsel for M/s.McGan Law Firm For Respondent : Mr.A.Veeramani

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of

¶22

Writ of Declaration to declare that the impugned Communication dated 21.01.2019 addressed to the Directorate of Higher Education, Government of Maharashtra is motivated, biased, without jurisdiction and therefore illegal and consequently forbear the respondent its men, agents and whomsoever claiming under the respondent from any manner publishing news articles and issuing communications, defaming the reputation of the petitioner company and against the petitioner company and to direct the respondent to issue a paper publication apologising and withdrawing its defamatory articles published in various news papers across the Country.

¶23

2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner Company is

¶24

registered on the file of Registrar of Companies, Chennai. The petitioner Company entered into Memorandum of Understanding dated

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

2/5

¶27

W.P.No.4147 of 2019

¶28

18.08.2017 with the respondent for services related to data validation and verification for assessment and accreditation purposes for a period of one year and the same was extended for a further period of three months. Whileso, the respondent issued show cause notice dated 31.10.2018 calling upon the petitioner to explain why action should not be initiated against the contract entered in to by it with the petitioner Company and the petitioner also gave a detailed reply dated 08.11.2018 and the petitioner was informed that the explanation given by them was accepted and further actions were dropped, however, the respondent issued the impugned communication to the Directorate of Higher Education, Maharashtra and published an news article on 23.01.2019 in Times of India stating that the respondent has banned the petitioner Company. Hence, this writ petition.

¶29

3.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that without going into the merits of the case, it would suffice, if this Court issue direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's explanation dated 08.11.2018 pursuant to the show cause notice dated 31.10.2018 and to pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time frame.

¶30

3/5

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

W.P.No.4147 of 2019

¶33

4.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel

¶34

appearing for the petitioner, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and without interfering with the impugned communication, directs the respondent to consider the petitioner's explanation dated 08.11.2018 pursuant to the show cause notice dated 31.10.2018, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

5.This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶36

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶37

23.03.2023

¶38

pri

¶39

Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No

¶40

¶41

National Assessment and Accreditation Council Rep. by its Director PO Box No.1075, Nagarbhavi, Bangalore – 560 072.

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

4/5

¶44

W.P.No.4147 of 2019

¶45

M.DHANDAPANI,J. pri

¶46

W.P.No.4147 of 2019 And W.M.P.No.4654 of 2019

¶47

23.03.2023

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶49

5/5

M/s. Indian Centre for Academic Ranking and Excellence Private Limited, v. National Assessment and Accrediation Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

M/s. Indian Centre for Academic Ranking and Excellence Private Limited, v. National Assessment and Accrediation Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Vijaya Vs Director of Techical Education

Rev. v. Thomas Vs The District Collector

Lalitha Vs The District Collector

Mrs.G.jayalakshmi Vs the General Manager

Slum Clearance Board Tenants and Small Shop Merchants Association Vs The Principal Secretary

Dr.a.Jalaludeen Vs The Registrar