Remanded

Managing Committee Rajputana U v. Hakim Mohd Shoib Qasmi

Rajasthan HC7 May 2015CW/5264/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge held that the status of Rajputana Unani Tibbi College as an aided institution under the 1983 Act is a disputed question of fact. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for determination of aid status and employee rights.

What did the court decide?

Orders dated 16.10.2004 and 22.11.2003 passed by the Tribunal set aside; matter remanded for determination; parties at liberty to file additional evidence.

Managing Committee Rajputana U Vs Hakim Mohd Shoib Qasmi — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1741/2005

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH JAIPUR

¶4

O R D E R

¶5

¶6

(1) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1741/2005 Managing Committee Rajputana Unani Tibbi College Vs.

¶7

Hakim Mohd. Shoib Qasmi & Ors.

¶8

(2) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5264/2005 Managing Committee Rajputana Unani Tibbi College Vs.

¶9

Hakim Mohd. Shoib Qasmi & Ors.

¶10

(3) S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2625/2004 Hakim Mohammad Shoiyav Qasmi Vs.

¶11

The Raj. Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal & Anr.

¶12

Date of Order : 07.05.2015

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶14

Mr. Akhil Simlote, for the petitioner.

¶15

Mr. Ankul Gupta, for the respondents. Mr. Parikshit Singh, for respondent No.3

¶16

BY THE COURT

¶17

In all the three petitions, the fundamental issue is as to whether the petitioner—Rajputana Unani Tibbi College is an aided institution or not under the Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1983 (hereinafter “the Act of 1983) read with the Rules of 1993 framed thereunder as the rights of the parties would be determinable accordingly.

¶18

The Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter “the Tribunal”) in its judgment dated 16.10.2004 has casually referred to the

¶19

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1741/2005

¶20

(2)

¶21

petitioner-College being an aided one under the Act of 1989 read with the Rules of 1993. The Tribunal has founded its conclusion on the petitioner-College being given one time grant without any evidence of a recurring grant. The conclusion was reached in the absence of the State Government, the grantor as it was ex-parte before the Tribunal.

¶22

In the petitions before this Court, the State Government has filed its reply stating that the petitioner-College is not an aided institution. This entails a serious disputed question of fact with regard to the status of the petitionerCollege as an aided institution whereupon dependent the rights of the defendant Hakim Mohd. Shoib Qasmi are.

¶23

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that the matter should be remanded to the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur for determination of the fundamental issue as to whether the petitioner-College is an aided institution or not under the Act of 1989 read with Rules of 1993 as the rights of the employees particularly the respondent No.1—Hakim Mohd. Shoib Qasmi as to pay and allowances and emoluments as also safeguards from dismissal would be dependant upon such a determination.

¶24

Consequently with the consent of the counsel for the parties, the orders dated 16.10.2004 and 22.11.2003, passed by the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur are set aside and the matter is remanded to the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal,

¶25

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1741/2005

¶26

(3)

¶27

Jaipur for the determination of the aforesaid question. The parties shall be at liberty to file additional pleadings and lead additional evidence, if so warranted. Amended pleadings and the evidence sought to be laid before the Tribunal by the parties, should be filed within eight weeks from today. The Tribunal shall thereupon proceed to dispose of the issue before it within a period of four months thereafter. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 20.07.2015 as agreed by counsel.

¶28

The writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly.

¶29

(ALOK SHARMA), J MS/-188

¶30

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.- Manoj Solanki, P.A.

Managing Committee Rajputana U v. Hakim Mohd Shoib Qasmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Managing Committee Rajputana U v. Hakim Mohd Shoib Qasmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaipur Central Co. Operative Bank Vs Rakesh Kumar Sharma andORS

Ashok Kumar Vs Director Elementary Edu Ors.

Mukesh Kumar Gurjar Vs State Home Departmentors

Shri Narayan Mahawar and Ors. Vs State Local Self Depors

Babu Lal Saini Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Bajrang Singh Vs State of Raj and Ors.