IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
HARSH BUNGER, J.
Shruti Bedi – Petitioner
Versus
Panjab University, Sector 14, Chandigarh & Ors. – Respondents
CWP-13091 of 2023 (O&M)
Decided On : 22-11-2023
JUDGMENT
Mr. Harsh Bunger, J.
Petitioner (Shruti Bedi) has filed the instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of order dated 31.05.2023 (Annexure P-13) appointing respondent No.6 as Director of University Institute of Legal Studies, Punjab University (respondent No.4).
A further prayer has been made for issuing a writ in the nature of Quo-Warranto against respondent No.6, who is stated to have usurped the public post of Director of University Institute of Legal Studies, having been appointed vide order dated 31.05.2023 (Annexure P-13) despite not being qualified as per the provisions of Rules of Legal Education, 2008.
Another prayer has been made for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent Nos.1 to 3 to appoint the petitioner as Director of respondent No.4-University Institute of Legal Studies, Punjab University, Chandigarh, being the senior-most eligible faculty member, as per the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 (Annexure P-2) read with Punjab University Rules of Headship of Teaching Departments of Punjab University Calendar, 2019 (Annexure P-1).
2. Briefly, the University Institute of Legal Studies (here-in-after called as 'the Institute') was constituted by the Punjab University in the year 2004; wherein the programme of five years' degree in B.A. LL.B. and B.Com LL.B, as well as, programmes awarding one year and two years LL.M. Degrees are undertaken and degrees are awarded. It is stated that respondent No.4-Institute has secured the approval/affiliation from the Bar Council of India (respondent No.5) which is the governing body in cases of institutions imparting legal education in India.
3. Then there are Rules of Headship of Teaching Department of Punjab University (in short 'Rules of Headship') as per Punjab University Calendar, 2019; whereby, each and every department of the University is required to have a Chairperson/Head, who is designated by the Senate on the recommendations of the Syndicate. Rule 2.1 of the Rules of Headship provides for appointment of Chairperson/Head of the Department on rotation basis from amongst the Professors by maintaining a seniority thereof. Further, in terms of Rule 2.3 of the Rules of Headship, the Chairperson/Head of the Department holds the office for a period of three years and after the cessation of the said period, the post is filled up from amongst the other eligible candidates in the Department by way of rotation. The aforesaid Rules 2.1 and 2.3 of the Rules of Headship, read as under :-
Bar Council of India v. Aparna Basu Mallick 1994 (2) S.C.T. 72 : 1994 (2) SCC 102
Bar Council of India v. Dayanand College of Law 2007 (1) S.C.T. 380 : (2007) 2 SCC 202
AI
The appointment of the Director of a legal education institute must comply with the qualifications set by the Bar Council of India's Rules of Legal Education, 2008.
Point of Law : Irrespective of whether the University Acts under Entry 25 of List III or the Statutes framed there under are amended in line with the UGC Regulations or not, in view of its adoption b....
Point of law: A criterion which has the effect of denying a candidate his right to be considered for the post on the principle that he is having higher qualification than prescribed cannot be rationa....
Educational institutions - Approval and affiliation - Order of "additional Affiliation/consent of affiliation - Denial of additional affiliation/consent for affiliation to the Nehru Academy of Law is....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the University's actions in limiting the intake of students and insisting on a NOC from the State Government were arbitrary and not justified ....
Eligibility for law course requires strict adherence to educational qualifications as set by the Bar Council of India, ruling out non-equivalent preparatory courses.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between the Bar Council of India's functions under Section 7(1)(h) and (i) of the Advocates Act, and the prohibition of offering ce....
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.