Dinesh Chandra Dubey Vs. The Registrar, Kanpur University
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. _____ of 1987
Arising out of SLP No. 12648 of 1986)
Arising out of SLP No. 12648 of 1986)
Petitioner: Dinesh Chandra Dubey
Respondent: The Registrar, Kanpur University
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. _____ of 1987
Arising out of SLP No. 12648 of 1986)
Arising out of SLP No. 12648 of 1986)
Judges: A.P. SEN & SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 02, 1987
Head Note:
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950:
Art. 226 – Dismissal or Writ Petition in limine by the High Court on the ground that appellant had an alternative remedy by way of an appeal before the Disciplinary Committee – Disciplinary Committee not constituted so far by the Executive Council as required under the Statute 8.01 – High Court should have heard the Writ Petition on merits – Matter remitted back to High Court for a hearing afresh.
Art. 226 – Dismissal or Writ Petition in limine by the High Court on the ground that appellant had an alternative remedy by way of an appeal before the Disciplinary Committee – Disciplinary Committee not constituted so far by the Executive Council as required under the Statute 8.01 – High Court should have heard the Writ Petition on merits – Matter remitted back to High Court for a hearing afresh.
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Special leave granted. Arguments heard.
2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the High Court was not justified in dismissing the petition filed by the appellant under Under Art. 226 of the Constitution on the ground that he had an alternative remedy by way of an appeal to the Disciplinary Committee constituted under Statute 8.01. It is not disputed before us that the Executive Council has not so far constituted any Disciplinary Committee as required by Statute 8. 01. That being so, the High Court should have heard the Writ Petition on merits.
3. Accordingly the appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of the High Court dismissing the Writ Petition in limine are set aside and the Writ Petition is remitted back to the High Court for a hearing afresh on merits after notice to the parties. The parties shall be at liberty to file such additional documents, if so advised, in support of their respective contentions.
Appeal allowed
1. Special leave granted. Arguments heard.
2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the High Court was not justified in dismissing the petition filed by the appellant under Under Art. 226 of the Constitution on the ground that he had an alternative remedy by way of an appeal to the Disciplinary Committee constituted under Statute 8.01. It is not disputed before us that the Executive Council has not so far constituted any Disciplinary Committee as required by Statute 8. 01. That being so, the High Court should have heard the Writ Petition on merits.
3. Accordingly the appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of the High Court dismissing the Writ Petition in limine are set aside and the Writ Petition is remitted back to the High Court for a hearing afresh on merits after notice to the parties. The parties shall be at liberty to file such additional documents, if so advised, in support of their respective contentions.
Appeal allowed
