SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
21st September, 1962
B.P. SINHA, C.J.I., S.J. IMAM, K. SUBBA RAO, K.N. WANCHOO, J.C. SHAH AND N. RAJAOPALA AYYANGAR, JJ.
1. Gujarat University and another (In C.A. No. 234 of 62) and 2. State of Gujarat (In C.A. No. 262 of 62), Appellants
Versus
Shri Krishna Ranganath Mudhokar and others (in both appeals), Respondents.
1. Principal St. Xaviers College, Ranchi (In C. A. No. 234/62) and 2. Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination and others (In both the appeals), Interveners.
Civil Appeals Nos. 234 and 262 of 1962.
Advocates appeared
M /s. J. C. Bhatt and H. K. Thakore, Adocates and Mr. V. J. Merchant, Advocate of M/s. Gagrat and Co., for Appellants (In C.A. No. 234 of 62 and Respondents Nos. 2 nd 3 in C. A. No. 262 of 62;) Mr. N. A. Palkhivala, Senior Advocate (Mr. C. T. Daru, Advocate and M/s. J. B. Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, Advocates of M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and Co. with him, for Respondent No. 1(In both the appeals ; Mr. M. C. Setalvad Attorney-General for India and Mr. J. M. Thakore, Advocate General for the State Gujarat (M/s. M. G. Doshit and R. H. Dhebar, Advocates with them), for Respondent No.3 (In C. A. No. 234 of 62); and Appellant (In C.A. No.262 of 62). M/s. I. M. Nanavati and R. Gopalakrishanan, Advocates, for Intervener No. 1 (In C. A. No.234 of 62) M/s. Frank Anthony, Charanjit Talwar and P. C. Agrawala, Advocates and M/s. J. B. Dadachanji, O.C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, Advocates of M/s. J. B. Dadachanji and Co., for Intervener No. 2 (in both the Appeals).
Judgment
SHAH, J. (with him. B. P. Sinha, C.J.I., Imam, Wanchoo and Rajagopala Ayyangar, JJ.) :
Shrikant son of Shri Krishna Mudholkar appeared for the Secondary School Certificate Examination held by the State of Bombay in March 1960 and was declared successful. He took instruction in the various subjects prescribed for the examination through the medium of Marathi (which is his mother tongue) and answered the questions at the examination also in the medium of Marathi. Shrikant joined the St. Xavier s College affiliated to the University of Gujarat, in the First Year Arts class and was admitted in the section in which instructions were imparted through the medium of English. After successfully completing the First Year Arts course in March, 1961, Shrikant applied for admission to this classes preparing for the Intermediate Arts examination of the University through the medium of English. The Principal of the College informed Shrikant that in view of the provisions of the Gujarat University Act 1949 and the Statues 207, 208 and 209 framed by the Senate of the University, as amended in 1961 he could not without the sanction of the University permit him to attend classes in which instructions were imparted through the medium of English. Shri Krishna, father of Shrikant then moved the Vice-Chancellor of the University for sanction to permit Shrikant to attend the "English medium classes" in the St. Xavier s College. The Registrar of the University declined to grant the request, but by another letter Shrikant was "allowed to keep English as a medium of examination" but not for instruction.
2. A petition was then filed by Shrikrishna Mudholkar on behalf of himself and his minor son Shrikant in the High Court of Gujarat for a writ or order in the nature of mandamus or other writ, direction or order requiring the University of Gujarat to treat Ss. 4(27), 18(i) (xiv) and 38A of the Gujarat University Act, 1949, and Statues 207, 208 and 209 as void and inoperative and to forbear from acting upon or enforcing those provisions and requiring the Vice-Chancellor to treat the letters or circulars issued by him in connection with the medium of instruction as illegal and to forbear from acting upon or enforcing the same, and also requiring the University to forbear from objecting to or from prohibiting the admission of Shrikant to "the English medium Intermediate Arts class," and requiring the Principal of the College to admit Shrikant to the "English medium Intermediate Arts class" on the footing that the impugned provisions of the Act, Statutes and letters and circulars were void and inoperative.
3. The High Court of Gujarat by order dated January 24, 1962 issued the writs prayed for. The University and the State of Gujarat have separately appealed to this Court with certificates of fitness granted by the High Court.
4. The judgment of the High Court proceeded upon diverse grounds which are summarised in their judgment as follows:
(1) Statutes 207 and 209 in so far as they seek to lay down and impose Gujarati and/or Hindi in Devnagri script as media of instruction and examination in institutions other than those maintained by the University are unauthorised and therefore null and void, for neither S. 4(27) nor any other provision of the Act empowers the University to lay down Gujarati or Hindi as a medium of instruction and examination in such institutions or to forbid the use of English as a medium of instruction and examination for and in such institutions;
(2) In any event, the University has the power only to lay down Gujarati or Hindi as one of the media of instruction and examination and not as the only medium of instruction and examination to the exclusion of other languages;
(3) The proviso to cl. 27 of S. 4 of the Gujarat University Act as amended by Act 4 of 1961 constitutes an encroachement on the field of Entry 66 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution and is therefore beyond the legislative competence of the State and th
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.