ARJIT PASAYAT, LOKESHWAR SINGH PANTA
University of Kerala – Appellant
Versus
Council, Principals' Colleges, Kerala – Respondent
Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:
ORDER :
Arjit Pasayat, J.
Heard.
2. We have perused the report of the Committee constituted by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India in terms of the order of this Court dated 12-12-2005. The Committee headed by Mr. J.M. Lyngdoh has submitted the report making recommendations and suggestions relating to Students' Union Elections. We are, prima facie, of the view that the recommendations need acceptance and as an interim measure, we direct the following recommendations to be implemented, subject to such modifications indicated hereinafter.
3. The recommendations are:
6.1.2. Where the atmosphere of the university campus is adverse to the conduct of peaceful, free and fair elections, the university, its constituent colleges and departments must initiate a system of student representation based on nominations, especially where elections are being held at present. It would be advisable, ho
None identified. The provided case law entry does not indicate any treatment such as overruled, reversed, or criticized. It appears to be a precedent accepted in relation to committee recommendations affecting student participation in elections within the University of Kerala. Without explicit language indicating negative treatment or overruling, this case cannot be classified as bad law.
Followed / Accepted:
Vice Chancellor, Kerala University of Fisheries & Ocean Studies vs Mohammad Rameesh K.P. - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 44382: The case is described as "precedent - Accepted committee recommendations," indicating it has been followed or accepted as good law in subsequent references. This suggests judicial approval or adherence to the ruling, reinforcing its status as a valid precedent.
Distinguished / Cited:
No cases explicitly identified as distinguished or cited as authoritative in a manner that alters their legal standing.
Criticized / Questioned:
No language or indication suggesting that the case has been criticized or questioned in subsequent rulings.
Reversed / Overruled:
No evidence from the provided list that this case has been overruled or reversed. The description does not mention any such treatment.
Abrogated:
No indication that the case has been abrogated or considered no longer valid.
The list contains only one case law entry with limited context. Due to the absence of explicit treatment indicators, the treatment status of this case remains clear as accepted, and there is no ambiguity to note here.
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.