- Court
- High Court of Gauhati
- Decided
- 23 May 2023
- Bench
- Sanjay Kumar Medhi
- Case no.
- WP(C) 2479/2015
Follow Gauhati High CourtFollow Sanjay Kumar Medhi
Judgment
ORDER
23.05.2023
Heard Shri S. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Shri Tahbildar, learned Standing Counsel, Higher Education Department, Shri A. Chamuah, learned UGC and Shri R. Islam, learned counsel for the respondent no. 6. At the outset, Shri Banik, the learned counsel fairly submits that there were a series of litigations connected with this issue on two broad grounds namely termination from service and provincialisation and both the issues have been conclusively determined by this Court whereby the terminations have been set aside and so far as provincialisation of their services are concerned, the petitioners have been directed to approach the Jurisdictional Educational Tribunal. Accordingly, Shri Banik, the learned counsel submits that substantially the grievances of the petitioners have been redressed. However, in this case, another point in support of the challenge to the termination order was taken which pertains to the jurisdiction of the Principal who had issued the termination order. It is submitted that the Principal was not even qualified under the law to hold the said post and therefore, could not have exercised the powers to terminate. On the other hand, Shri Tahbildar, the learned Standing Counsel, Higher Education Department submits that though, on principle the petitioners may have a point, the incumbent who was holding the post of Principal at that time has not been made a party respondent in this proceeding by name. He, therefore, submits that no effective orders can be passed in this petition. The said view of the learned Standing Counsel is also endorsed by Shri A. Chamuah, the learned Standing Counsel, UGC as well as Shri R. Islam the learned Counsel for the respondent no. 6 who additionally Page No.# 4/4 submits that there is no live cause of action at all to be adjudicated as the issue has been conclusively decided and no further appeal has been filed. Considering the aforesaid submissions, this Court is also of the view that there is no live cause of action to be adjudicated. As regards to the point questioning the eligibility of the respondent no. 6, this Court is of the opinion that since the respondent no. 6 was not made party by name, the said issue cannot be gone into in this writ petition. Therefore, while closing the writ petition due to want of any live cause of action, liberty is given to the petitioners to raise that point in an appropriate manner, if so advised. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Case details
Parties and counsel
PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010012472015 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/2479/2015o ASIRoUDDINoAHMEDoando2oORS.o S/OoLT.oGOTUoSHEIKH,oR/OoABHAYAPURIoROUMARI,oP.O.oABHAYAPURI,o DIST-oBONGAIGAON 2:oDEWANoMD.oSHAMSULoALOM oS/OoABDULoAWALoDEWAN oR/OoBALAIPATHAR oP.O.oKALGACHIA oDIST-oBARPETA 3:oANOWARoHUSSAIN oS/OoLT.oMOHIoUDDINoAHMED oR/OoVILL.oandoP.O.oISABPUR oDIST-oBARPETo VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo10oORSo REP.oBYoTHEoCOMMISSIONERoandoSECY.oTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,o HIGHERoEDUCATIONoDEPTT.,oDISPUR,oGHY-6 2:THEoDIRECTORoOFoHIGHERoEDUCATION oASSAM oKAHILIPARA oGHY-19 3:THEoDY.oCOMMISSIONER oBONGAIGAON oASSAM 4:THEoINSPECTORoOFoSCHOOLS oBONGAIGAON oASSAM Page No.# 2/4 5:THE GOVERNING BODY REP. BY THE PRESIDENT OF RAJIB GANDHI MEMORIAL COLLEGE LENGTISINGA P.O. LENGTISINGA DIST- BONGAIGAON ASSAM PIN-783384 6:THE PRINCIPAL CUM MEMBER SECRETARY RAJIB GANDHI MEMORIAL COLLEGE LENGTISINGA P.O. LENGTISINGA DIST- BONGAIGAON ASSAM PIN-783384 7:THE MAGADH UNIVERSITY BODHGAYA BIHAR REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR 8:THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS MAGADH UNIVERSITY BODHGAYA BIHAR 9:THE VICE CHANCELLOR MAGADH UNIVERSITY BODHGAYA BIHAR 10:THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION REP. BY THE SECY. BAHADUR SHAH ZAFOR MARG NEW DELHI-1 11:THE UNION OF INDIA REP BY THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVL. NEW DELHI- Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.H GUPTA Advocate for the Respondent : MS.K BARPUJARI Page No.# 3/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Source: High Court of Gauhati, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.