Disposed

National Senior Secondary School, Panipat and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Apr 2012CWP/6373/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-paragraph order allowed a Public Interest Litigation filed by a school against a restraint on using 'Indian/National' in its name. The court directed the petitioners to file a representation before authorities, which must then be disposed of expeditiously. No opinion was expressed on merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioners to file a detailed representation; authorities to dispose of it expeditiously by passing a speaking order.

National Senior Secondary School, Panipat… — Education and Admissions | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

::1::

¶2

CWP No.6373 of 2012 (O & M)

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.6373 of 2012 (O & M) Date of Decision: April 03, 2012

¶5

National Senior Secondary School, Panipat through its Manager and another

¶6

....Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

Union of India and others

¶9

.... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

¶11

Present: Mr. Yowan Sharma, Advocate, for Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶12

¶13

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

¶14

The grievance of the petitioners in the present petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is against order dated 20.12.2011 (Annexure P-6) and letter dated 02.03.2012 (Annexure P-5) passed by respondents No.2 and 3 respectively whereby the respondents have restrained the petitioners from using the word “Indian/National” in the name of their School.

¶15

On a query being put to learned counsel for the petitioners as to whether the petitioners have made any representation with regard to the grievances raised by them in the present petition to the concerned authorities at the first instance, learned counsel is unable to dispute the fact that no such

¶16

::2::

¶17

CWP No.6373 of 2012 (O & M)

¶18

representation has been filed by the petitioners to the concerned authorities raising any grievance therein as is suggested in the present petition. He, however, states that the petitioners shall file such representation and further states that a direction may be issued to the concerned authorities to decide the same within some timebound frame.

¶19

Accordingly, after hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, perusing the petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of by allowing the petitioners to file a detailed and comprehensive representation before the concerned authorities at the first instance. However, in case, any such representation is filed by the petitioners,

¶20

the concerned authority shall dispose of the same by passing a speaking order in accordance with law expeditiously.

¶21

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE

¶22

April 03, 2012 sukhpreet

National Senior Secondary School, Panipat and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

National Senior Secondary School, Panipat and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samparak Social Awareness Community etc. Vs Union of India and Others

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Subhash Gupta and Anr.

Naresh Kuamr Soni Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Amandeep Singh and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Gill Cooperative L&C Society (Diploma Holder) Ltd. and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

M/S Jasbir Singh & Co. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.