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

2008 Supreme(All) 315

ANJANI KUMAR, SUDHIR AGARWAL
HARIKANT MISHRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


JUDGMENT

By the Court.—Counter and rejoinder affidavits are exchanged and, therefore, as requested and agreed by learned Counsel for the parties this writ petition has been heard and is being decided finally at the admission stage under the Rules of the Court.

2. Aggrieved by the order dated 1.3.2007 whereby the Registrar, Jagadguru Rambhadracharya Viklang Viswavidyalaya, Chitrakoot (hereinafter referred to as the “University”) has informed the petitioner that his services would come to an end on 31.3.2007, the petitioner, Dr. Harikant Mishra has approached this Court in the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the said order. He has also sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay him regular salary and not to interfere in his peaceful functioning as Lecturer/Assistant Professor in the University. By means of amendment, the petitioner has further challenged the order dated 31.3.2007, whereby the University has communicated its decision to the petitioner of abolition of post held by him.

3. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition, as stated in the writ petition, are that the Un


































































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