Patna High Court dismissed a PIL seeking direction not to develop unrecognized colleges and punish institutions issuing false certificates. Finding no merit and no direct grievance by the petitioner, the court dismissed the petition.
Direction to not develop unrecognized colleges was denied; writ petition dismissed.
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 PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15867 of 2014
======================================================
Rajeev Nayan, Son of Sri Arvind Kumar, resident of village - Baliya Bujurg, P.O. Rajhat ( Nawada ), District - Nawada
.... .... Petitioner/s Versus
.... .... Respondent/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar (ASG)
Dr. Punam Kumari Singh, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2 22-06-2015 This writ petition is filed by way of Public Interest Litigation with a prayer to direct the respondents not to develop any colleges or universities that are not recognized by the University Grant Commission (UGC) and to punish such of the universities which are issuing false certificates to the teachers. From the pleading in the writ petition, it appears that the grievance of the petitioner is mostly against the Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture Technology & Science, Allahabad, which is impleaded as respondent no.2.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Patna High Court CWJC No.15867 of 2014 (2) dt.22-06-2015
2/2
The only document filed by the petitioner is an advertisement said to have been issued by the 2nd respondent inviting applications for various courses such as MBA, MCA etc. In case the 2nd respondent is not recognized by UGC, the certificates issued by it, would not be of any use. It is only when a candidate, who has studied in the institution comes forward with a complaint that he has been cheated or deceived, that the occasion may arise for taking any action. It was not even alleged that the petitioner made an application or has studied any course under the 2nd respondent.
We do not find any merit in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.
(L. Narasimha Reddy,CJ)
(Sudhir Singh, J)
mrl
U
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking a direction not to develop unrecognized colleges was maintainable.
Whether the petitioner suffered any grievance regarding false certificates issued by the respondent institution.
Rajeev Nayan
The Union of India
The Vice Chancellor, SHIATS
Chief Justice L. Narasimha Reddy
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
