Back
MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, ANISH KUMAR GUPTA
State Of U P – Appellant
Versus
Manoj Kumar Jain – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. disputed appointment circumstances. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. arguments regarding regulation 101 applicability. (Para 10 , 14 , 38 , 39) |
| 3. court observation on regulatory provisions. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. analysis of the legal implications of regulation 101. (Para 15 , 16 , 18 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. court affirmations and legal interpretations regarding minority institution regulations are provided. (Para 30 , 46 , 50) |
| 6. conclusion on the applicability of regulation 101. (Para 42 , 43 , 53) |
| 7. conclusion drawn affirming the applicability of regulation and ruling in favor of the appellants. (Para 55) |
| 8. final order allowing the special appeal. (Para 56) |
JUDGMENT :
Hon. Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J.
1. Heard Shri Fuzail Ahmad Ansari, learned Standing Counsel and Shri Ashish Mohan Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents-appellants and Shri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for petitioner-respondent no.1.
2. This Court vide order dated 23.5.2024 has condoned the delay in filing the appeal and has directed to accord regular number to the appeal.
3. Present intra court appeal under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the HIGH COURT RULES has been preferred assailing the vali
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
