Petitioner challenged internal college management disputes concerning a vacancy in the President's office via a writ petition. This court dismissed the petition for want of maintainability against official respondents and presence of disputed facts.
Petitioner directed to seek alternative remedy before the Civil Court.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH *******
CWP No.7314 of 2013 DATE OF DECISION : 05.04.2013
Varinder Kumar Aggarwal Versus
....Petitioner
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
Present : Mr. Sameer Sachdev, Advocate, for the petitioner.
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner claims to be President of the Madho Ram Daya Ram Sanatan Dharm Girls College (MDSD Girls College), Ambala City. The President of the society died on 05.02.2013 leading to the vacancy of the President in the office of the President.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that clause 6(b) of Kurukshetra University Calendar 2009, Volume-I, Ordinance XVI Appendix-I, lays down that if the post of President of governing body falls vacant, for any reason, the Vice President would act as a President for the remaining period of the term. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that clause 6(b) are not bye-laws approved by the District Registrar, Firms and Societies, Ambala, Haryana, but have been adopted by the Society for its own governance.
If this is the position, then this Court fails to see how clause 6(b) would operate in a manner that will make the society 'other authorities' within the meaning of Article 226 of the Constitution of India and thus, cannot seek a direction, either to the State of Haryana or the Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, to invoke clause 6(b). Apparently, there are disputes within the management and a third person has been appointed as Vice President by some internal mechanism. It is this grievance which the petitioner has brought to this Court. He seeks a
direction, inter alia , to the Director General, Higher Education, Haryana, Panchkula for redressal of his grievance on the ground that the College run by the Society, receives grant-in-aid. I am afraid, a direction cannot go either to the State of Haryana or the Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, to redress the grievance of the petitioner based on grant-inaid which fact alone cannot make the dispute resolvable in writ jurisdiction. The petition is, apparently, not maintainable against the official respondents including the Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra. In any case, disputed questions of fact are involved, which cannot be resolved in writ jurisdiction, even assuming arguendo the petition was maintainable. This petition is, therefore, dismissed for want of maintainability against the official respondents. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved, he may seek his alternative remedy before the Civil Court for redressal of his grievances, in accordance with law.
Dismissed with the aforesaid liberty.
05.04.2013 adhikari
(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a direction can be issued to the State or University to invoke college governance clauses to resolve internal management disputes.
Whether disputed questions of fact regarding college governance are maintainable in writ jurisdiction under Article 226.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Varinder Kumar Aggarwal
State of Haryana
Kurukshetra University
RAJIV NARAIN RAINA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
