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

2026 Supreme(All) 359

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SIDDHARTH NANDAN
Committee of Management Janta Janardan Shiksha Sadan Inter College Tilaon – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Chandra Jeet Yadav, Saurabh Tripathi
For the Respondents: Abhyuday Shukla, C.S.C., Satya Prakash Rai, Vashishtha Dhar Shukla, Yogita Shukla

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The judgment emphasizes that strict adherence to quorum is essential for the Regional Level Committee’s functioning and that decisions made in the absence of a member violate procedural requirements. (!) (!) - It rejects the blanket application of the doctrine of necessity in the absence of impossibility to fulfill the quorum, asserting that such doctrine cannot override the need for full participation unless truly impossible. (!) (!) - The court sets aside the impugned orders due to incomplete quorum and directs nominations from the government or adjournment strategies to ensure proper quorum in future proceedings. (!) (!) (!)

What is the scope and mandatory nature of quorum under Government Order dated 19.12.2000 for the Regional Level Committee?

What is the applicability of the doctrine of necessity or doctrine of silence in case of incomplete quorum for Regional Level Committee decisions?

What remedies or procedures are required when a Regional Level Committee lacks a full quorum to decide disputes, including nominations from the government or transfers to neighboring regions?


Table of Content
1. legal proceedings regarding the management of the institution. (Para 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10)
2. details on recent elections and decisions affecting management. (Para 11 , 13 , 15 , 16)
3. arguments surrounding quorum and compliance with the government order. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
4. analysis of implications of the government order. (Para 21 , 22 , 23)
5. discussion on the doctrine of necessity and its application. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
6. counterarguments to the invocation of necessity doctrine. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
7. judicial precedents on quorum and decision-making. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
8. examining dissent as essential to decision-making. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40)
9. the implications of not achieving full membership in committees. (Para 41 , 42 , 43)
10. final considerations on managing quorum issues. (Para 44 , 45 , 46)
11. final orders and directives of the court. (Para 60 , 61 , 62 , 63)

JUDGMENT :

SIDDHARTH NANDAN, J.

1. With the consent of the parties, since the question is purely legal in nature, the present writ petition is being decided at the admission stage.

2. Heard Shri Prabhaker Awasthi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Saurabh

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