Dismissed

Management Committee St Anselam v. Shri Ravindra Sharma and Ors.

Rajasthan HC16 Dec 2014CW/13911/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order of the Rajasthan Non-Governmental Educational Institutions Tribunal. The petitioner sought liberty to take a decision based on amended rules regarding grounds under Rule 30.1. The court held no interference was warranted and ruled that necessary liberty to decide appropriately was always available to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition and stay application were dismissed. Liberty to take appropriate decision under amended Rule 30.1 is granted.

Management Committee St Anselam Vs Shri Ravindra… — Education and Admissions | Rajasthan HC (2014)

¶1

SB CI VI L WRI T PETI TI ON NO. 13911/ 14.

¶2

¶3

SB CI VI L WRI T PETI TI ON NO. 13911/ 14.

¶4

Management Commi t t ee St . Ansel m' s Sr . Secondar y School Vs. Shr i Ravi ndr a Shar ma & Or s.

¶5

HON' BLE MS. JUSTI CE BELA M. TRI VEDI

¶6

Dat e of Or der : : 16. 12. 2014

¶7

Mr . Di nesh Yadav f or t he pet i t i oner / s. Mr . Suni l Samdar i a f or t he r espondent / s.

¶8

ORDER

¶9

The wr i t pet i t i on has been f i l ed by t he pet i t i oner chal l engi ng t he or der dat ed 10. 11. 14 passed by t he Raj ast han Non- Gover nment al Educat i onal I nst i t ut i ons Tr i bunal , Jai pur . Af t er ar gui ng f or some t i me, t he l ear ned counsel Mr . Di nesh Yadav f or t he pet i t i oner has f ai r l y submi t t ed t hat i t has been cont ended i n t he r epl y f i l ed on behal f of t he pet i t i oner bef or e t he Tr i bunal t hat t he CBSE Af f i l i at i on Bye Laws ar e appl i cabl e t o t he pet i t i oner i nst i t ut e and t hat i n t he i mpugned or der dat ed 26. 6. 14 passed by t he pet i t i oner , none of t he gr ounds as cont empl at ed i n Rul e 30. 1 of t he Raj ast han NonGover nment Educat i onal I nst i t ut i ons ( Recogni t i on, Gr ant - I n- Ai d and Ser vi ce Condi t i ons, Et c. ) Rul es, 1993 ( her ei naf t er r ef er r ed t o as ' t he sai d Rul es' ) have been ment i oned. However , accor di ng t o hi m t he pet i t i oner be gr ant ed l i ber t y t o t ake appr opr i at e deci si on i n t he l i ght of t he amended Rul e 30. 1 of t he sai d Rul es, i f anyt hi ng adver se i s f ound agai nst t he pet i t i oner .

¶10

SB CI VI L WRI T PETI TI ON NO. 13911/ 14. 2

¶11

However , i t i s submi t t ed by t he l ear ned counsel Mr . Suni l Samdar i a f or t he r espondent s t hat such l i ber t y i s al ways t her e and no such l i ber t y i s r equi r ed t o be gr ant ed speci f i cal l y by t hi s cour t , and i n any case t he or der passed by t he Tr i bunal i s r equi r ed t o be i mpl ement ed by t he pet i t i oner .

¶12

Havi ng r egar d t o t he submi ssi ons made by t he l ear ned counsel s f or t he par t i es, t he cour t as such does not f i nd any r eason t o i nt er f er e wi t h t he i mpugned or der passed by t he Tr i bunal mor e par t i cul ar l y i n vi ew of t he submi ssi on made by t he l ear ned counsel f or t he pet i t i oner and t her ef or e t he pet i t i on deser ves t o be di smi ssed. So f ar as t he l i ber t y sought by t he l ear ned counsel f or t he pet i t i oner i s concer ned, i t i s needl ess t o say t hat such l i ber t y i s al ways t her e and appr opr i at e deci si on coul d al ways be t aken by t he pet i t i oner , i f any of t he gr ounds as cont empl at ed i n pr ovi so t o t he amended Rul e 30. 1 of t he sai d Rul es i s f ound i n f ut ur e. 4. Wi t h t hese obser vat i ons, t he pr esent pet i t i on st ands di smi ssed. 5. By t hi s or der , t he st ay appl i cat i on al so st ands di smi ssed.

¶13

( BELA M. TRI VEDI ) J.

¶14

MRG

¶15

Al l cor r ect i ons made i n t he j udgment / or der have been i ncor por at ed i n t he j udgment / or der bei ng emai l ed. MRG/ PS

Management Committee St Anselam v. Shri Ravindra Sharma and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Management Committee St Anselam v. Shri Ravindra Sharma 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

Amar Singh Vs State Coop Departmentors

Mohanlal Saini Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Sarfraj Ali and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Sonal Agarwal Vs State Women and Child DEPARTMENTand Ors.

Siyaram Meena and Anr. Vs State Education Departmentors

Rakesh Kumar Meena Vs State Education Departmentors