SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(Mad) 760

RAJU
Association of University Teachers – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu and Another – Respondent


Appearing Advocates: For

24. After careful consideration of the respective submissions of the learned counsel we are of the view that the decision of the Supreme Court in St. Xaviers College v. Gujarat (supra) and the ratio laid down therein should not be taken to declare as an invariable rule that there can be no provision for an appeal against an order passed by the management of a minority educational institution in exercise of its disciplinary proceedings and that any provision providing for such an appeal will constitute serious inroad into the rights secured under Art. 30(1) of the Constitution of India. So far as the ratio of the decision in St. Xaviers College case (supra) is concerned, the judgment of Ray C.J. could be taken to be generally the sum and substance of the views expressed by the other learned Judges.On the scope of rights secured under Act. 30(1) of the Constitution of India, the learned Chief Justice declared as follows :-

"Therefore, measures which will regulate the courses of study, the qualifications and appointment of teachers, the conditions of employment of teachers, the health and hygiene of students, facilities for libraries and laboratories are all comprised in matters german



















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top