Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ, MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI, J
SATISH PRADYUMNA PATHAK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
SUNITA AGARWAL, C.J.
1. We may record, at the outset, that Mr. Sudhir I. Nanavati, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Mrugen Purohit, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 would submit that the present petition may be rendered infructuous with the submission of the resignation by respondent No.6 and acceptance of the same by the State Government, before hearing in the writ petition could commence.
2. The submission is that the Public Interest Litigation has been filed with a prayer for issuance of writ of quo-warranto, on the premise that the appointment of respondent No.6 on the post of Vice Chancellor is illegal, being contrary to the regulations framed by the University Grants Commission (UGC). But with the submission of the resignation and acceptance thereof by the State Government, once respondent No.6 has left the office of the Vice Chancelor, writ of quo-warranto cannot be issued. The submission of the learned senior counsel for respondent No.6, thus, is that the only option before the Court is to render writ petition infructuous with the acceptance of the resignation of respondent No.6. Mr. Anshin Desai, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Baiju Josh
The court retains jurisdiction to examine the merits of a public interest litigation challenging an appointment, even after the resignation of the individual involved renders the specific writ moot.
A litigant invoking PIL jurisdiction must approach the court with clean hands and disclose all relevant facts. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of the action without examining the merits ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a writ petition seeking a writ of Quo-Warranto against a public official may need to be filed as public interest litigation if it does not inv....
The court ruled that the appointment of the Registrar was valid as it followed the proper selection process, and the petitioner lacked locus standi and delayed in filing the writ petition.
A writ of certiorari seeking to quash the appointment of a sitting Vice-Chancellor is not maintainable, necessitating a fresh examination of the legal submissions by the learned Single Judge.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
